In chapter one of A Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez creates dramatic irony and an air of missed opportunities while referencing clairvoyance and fantasy. The first chapter follows the story of the death of Santiago Nasar from the perspective of the narrator with a few supplemental interviews that were conducted 27 years after the event. The narrator of this story is an unnamed son of Luisa Santiaga. It is written as a first person narrative, but it has instances where it is similar to a third-person omniscient point of view, because it seems as though the narrator knows what everyone was thinking. This could partly be true due to the interviews he conducted with the witnesses after the event, but the writing style makes it seem like he can see into their minds. The first chapter of this chronicle introduces an aspect of the fantastical which helps establish this novel as part of the genre of magical realism. Santiago’s mother had “a well-earned reputation as an accurate interpreter of other people’s dreams” (Marquez 4), however in this instance she “hadn’t noticed any ominous augury in those two dreams of her son’s” (4). This shows that in general, Placida Linero, Santiago’s mother, was believed to be able to interpret dreams, but in this instance she does not see anything wrong with her son's dream, even though everyone already knew he was going to die. This displays a shortcoming of the fantastical. Even though shortcomings of the fantastical are present in this book, this book does not disrespect the fantastical, and in a manner inherent to magical realism, presents it in a reasonable way. Another aspect of the fantastical in chapter one was “The Fatal Door” (12), and how it seemed that everything was predetermined. The author’s style in this novel also reflects this idea. The first sentence of the book reveals that Nasar will die, which makes it seem as though it was predetermined by fate. This idea of fate and predetermined destiny will be further examined in later chapters.
In the book "Chronicle of a Death Foretold" by Gabriel Garcia Márquez, the author uses animal imagery to show an ironic theme while creating the dominant effect of apathy. In chapter one, the author uses the image of a rooster crow to foreshadow the death of Santiago Nasar, " 'Then the boat stopped tooting and the cocks began to grow,' she told me" (page14). In books, authors usually use the image of a rooster crow as a measurement of time in the story. In nature, roosters crow all the time to warn other chickens of coming dangers. In this particular novel, the author choice of using this image as a foreshadow to warn readers of the coming murders. This image is also a way the author shows apathy in the citizens of the town. Every time the author mentions this image, the citizens are celebrating the coming of the bishop. This implies the people of the town as religious, but the irony comes with this is the fact that they break one of the ten commandments, "Thou shalt not kill", indirectly; they are not involve in the murder but still is responsible because they did not report the warning to the authority. -Nam Nguye
“Nevertheless, no sooner had she heard the news then she put on her high-heeled shoes and the church shawl she only wore for visits of condolence. My father, who had heard everything from his bed, appeared in the dining room in his pajamas and asked in alarm where she was going. "To warn my dear friend Plácida," she answered. "It isn't right that everybody should know that they're going to kill her son and she the only one who doesn't." "We've got the same ties to the Vicario's that we do with her," my father said. "You always have to take the side of the dead," she said.” (1.42)
This passage is odd, because it depicts the moments before Santiago Nasar's is murdered. Most of the story at this point has been centered around his death and this specific passage shines light on the key question most readers ask at this point. Why does the mother of the narrator go to his mom to warn her? Wouldn’t it be more prudent to go to Santiago to warn him? The line, “It isn't right that everybody should know that they're going to kill her son and she the only one who doesn't” (1.42). Puts into perspective the irony of the situation. They seem to act like they really care about this death and that it truly affects them, but in reality it seems that for some reason they don’t care about him dying. The sentence should include he instead of she, because they should be telling Santiago. The reason they feel this way deep down is unknown, but perhaps it’s that these people are afraid of the Vicario brothers or that they are just too lazy to get involved in any conflict. Maybe even Santiago has done things in his past to provoke them or that have been seen as unfavorable to the community. whatever the case it seems to be an overreaction to the situation. To let someone die as they seem to be doing, is as bad as killing them. Indifference is a sin to humanity. There is a large amount of faith put in the believe that he has a fate to be fulfilled, at least form the background knowledge given to the class before hand and the passage seems to confirm this theme.
In chapter 1 of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, life and death are symbolized through the clothes of of Santiago Nasar and the Vicario brothers. Santiago wears all white, a symbol for life while the Vicario brothers wear all black, a symbol for death. Throughout the entire first chapter while many of the book's characters are aware of Santiago’s eventual demise, Santiago himself isn't. In fact he has a rather positive attitude about the day. Santiago carries an air of positivity with him and has no idea that he’s going to die. His clothes symbolize the fresh life he has ahead of him, he’s an educated young man who's going to be running a ranch. Santiago clearly has a promising life ahead of him, that he is unaware will be snuffed out. This is somewhat ironic as one would expect Santiago, who is set die to be wearing clothes symbolic of death, as a means of foreshadowing and mood setting. Instead the use of white clothes contributes to characterization and juxtaposition to the Vicario brothers. The Vicario brothers, wear all black to symbolize their roles as death dealers. Black is synonymous with death, it’s dealers, and it’s harbingers. The all black ensemble of the Vicario brothers make them reminiscent of the grim reaper. A possible reason that the Vicario’s assault Santiago is due to believing that he took their sister, Margot’s, virginity prior to her marriage. This causes her to be sent home after her marriage, which is akin to robbing her of future life. This motivates the Vicarios to take Santiago's life as retribution.
The first chapter of Chronicles of a Death Foretold, by Gabriel Garcia Marquez, describes the day that Santiago Nasar was murdered, 27 years prior. Santiago Nasar is a young owner of a small ranch and seems to be doing well for himself. Marquez characterized him in the opening pages of the book as open and optimistic person even with the struggles that he has had in his life, “ By his nature, Santiago Nasar was merry and peaceful and open hearted,” (Marquez 8). Santiago was characterized as a friendly person, that makes me wonder why someone would murder him, and why no he had gotten no warning. The entire town knew of the twins plans to murder Santiago, yet people had normal interactions with him on the day of his murder and didn’t mention a thing. This could be because of the bishop visiting the town. The bishop's arrival was a distraction to the town, “ There were a lot of people at the dock, in addition to the authorities and the school children, and everywhere one can see crates of well-fattened roosters they were bearing as a gift to the bishop,” (16). It’s a possibility that a warning didn’t get to Santiago because of the bishop coming to town. It is also ironic that Santiago was murdered on this day, because the bishop was visiting. Murder directly goes against bishop’s religion. Him not getting off of the boat to visit the town could also foreshadow Santiago’s death. This could maybe be about how the bishop couldn’t greet the town because of the murder and lies that take place there.
I agree that somebody should have warned that poor idiot, but I believe that Nasar was not the “merry and peaceful” man he is initially characterized as. Sure he is rich and good looking, but he sexually assaults his servant girl and “grabs her whole pussy”. Yikes! I think that Marquez presents all of his characters with some redeemable qualities and some obvious flaws to create the idea that nobody is completely absolved of blame for the crime that will occur, but also that nobody is completely guilty for Nasar’s murder. Every character is described with obvious flaws, like molesting your servant girl and sleeping with prostitutes, and obvious good qualities, like being a nice fiance and being overall “open hearted”. I think this may also be a comment on human nature; no matter how great of a person someone is, they’ve still done some weird stuff that people mostly ignore. Still the always angry feminist in me finds it really hard to forgive molesting someone whose name is “Divina Flor”. I mean divine flower! How much more pure can you get!
Angela’s confession at the end of chapter two of “Chronicle of a Death Foretold” reveals the motive of the murder of Santiago Nasar and helps establish the idea that each character is partly to blame for this crime. In this novel there are no simple condemnations, and instead every character is flawed and complicated. Marquez characterizes the people in this story with obvious imperfections, which help support the idea that everyone shares some portion of the blame. The most significant plot point in the second chapter is Angela revealing that it was Santiago Nasar who took her virginity. It described how, “She took only the time necessary to say the name. She looked for it in the shadows, she found it at first sight among many, many easily confused names from this world and the other, and she nailed it to the wall with her well-aimed dart, like a butterfly with no will whose sentence has always been written.” (Marquez 47). This quote is significant in a number of ways. Firstly, it alludes to the supernatural and the idea of fate. It describes “this world and the other” which adds an aspect of the supernatural to this passage. This further puts this novel into the genre of magical realism. Additionally, this passage references fate when it says “with no will whose sentence has always been written.” This creates the idea that the events that occurred in this novel were all predetermined and were caused by fate instead of free will. This absolves the characters of some blame. This passage also alludes to the manner in which Nasar will be killed. It describes him as “like a butterfly” pinned to a wall, which actually occurs later when he is killed on his front door and literally pinned to a wall. This foreshadowing characterizes him as helpless in the hands of fate. Finally, this passage reveals Santiago’s likely innocence. Angela “looked for [his name] in the shadows” and describes how any man's name would have sufficed. This can support the idea that all men share the blame for what follows because of the patriarchal society that values her only for her virginity.
In chapter three of A Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Marquez showcases the patriarchal views of society, specifically in the value placed on female virginity. In chapter 3 it is discussed how the men in the novel have slept around with prostitutes, specifically “the most serviceable in bed” (64), Maria Alejandrina Cervantes. The narrator describes her as “the most elegant and the most tender woman I have ever known” (64) and goes on to describe how “it was she who did away with my generation’s virginity” (65). This quote obviously refers to the men of this generation. The idea of purity linked to abstaining from premarital sex is obviously only applicable to women in this society. Angela is returned from her husband’s bed and beaten nearly to death by her mother for committing the same “wrongs” that were completely acceptable when committed by the men. Santiago Nasar and Pablo Vicario are both described as having premarital sex and engaging in frequent sexual relations with the prostitutes of the town. Prostitutes are even provided as a service at the wedding, and it described how “They’d been working without cease for three days, first taking care of the guests of honor in secret then turned loose, the doors wide open for those of us still unsated by the wedding bash” (64). This compares the girls to wedding entertainment to be utilized when one was bored. Talk about sexism! And this idea of virginity being “pure” brings into question if any character in this novel is really pure. Every character presented has secrets and weaknesses, so this standard of complete purity is obviously ridiculous. I think Marquez was criticizing the idea of virginity as the symbol of female purity, and that this standard demonstrates how this society did not fundamentally understand the idea of a human being as an innately flawed creature. This unrealistic value placed on female virginity eventually leads to an unnatural murder.
In chapter two of A Chronicle of a Death Foretold, the reader is let into the culture of arranged marriages and pride in wealth. Marquez tells the story of a young girl, Angela Vicario, who is assigned by her parents to marry a rich strange man that she has never met. Women in this culture have little to no freedom, especially when dealing with marriage and their future. They are treated as possessions instead of people. Marquez introduces Bayardo San Roman in chapter two and characterizes him as a very wealthy and selfish man, though the whole family only sees him for his popularity and bright future. Roman attempts to woo the family and makes an effort to impress his future wife, making him a more appealing husband to her family. This proves how powerless women are as their whole life is planned around them without them ever having a say. Bayardo San Roman repeatedly shows off his wealth both to prove to the family and the rest of society how important he is. When told about the cost of the wedding, Marquez writes, “Bayardo San Roman, on the other hand, took it very graciously and even with a certain pride. ‘“Almost,”’ he said, “’but we’re only beginning. When it’s all over it will be twice that, more or less” (Marquez 43). It is common in these societies to show off wealth and Roman went to extravagant measures to prove this because this not only reflects his image, but the family’s image as well. Women must put up with the behavior of the man no matter what. An example of this is when Angela says, “’I would have been happy even if he hadn’t come, but never if he had abandoned me dressed up.’” Her caution seemed natural, because there was no public misfortune more shameful than for a woman to be jilted in her bridal gown” (Marquez 41). Again, this is about keeping up appearances and women concerned about society’s expectations. This event applies to many women across the globe and shows what they go through daily. This gives the reader knowledge about the society they live in and a better understanding of the characters and setting in general.
I really like your analysis! It's spot on and hits all the points in my opinion. Angela's situation is very symbolic to that of women in the Colombian society but also that of women in the early 1900s. Many women like Angela didn't make their own decisions and were used to keep up appearances, like women in may cultures around the world. Angela is also representative of her families honor, since when she is "sullied" by having her virginity taken away, the Vicario brothers see this as sullying their families honor.
“The boys were brought up to be men. The girls had been reared to get married…‘They’re perfect,’ she was frequently heard to say. ‘Any man will be happy with them because they’ve been raised to suffer.’” (Marquez, page 34)
This chapter tries to put the previous in context with the background on some of the characters and the cause for Santiago’s death. This specific piece of the chapter explains the obvious gender roles shackling the characters, and mostly the women in the story. Women have a lot expected of them at this time, and one of those things expected is virginity. Premarital sex is not something that is largely approved of and this is largely due to the Catholic influence in Colombia where the book takes place. So the idea that women are good for marriage only, helps the reader understand the predicament that she is in when the new husband finds that she is not a virgin and the Santiago is the man who has taken her virginity. Societal norms have now put Santiago in a precarious state where he may be now at risk because of his actions that go against traditional catholicism. It is also very funny how she is treated after the husband and mother find out she is not a virgin, because they scorn her severely. While she is punished for her negligence, the men including Santiago are having their fun at a whorehouse. The hypocrisy of that is seen in the quote above with the line, “because they’ve been raised to suffer.” This points at the inequality and hypocrisy in their believes. It also adds to the darkness that shrouds the story around the story.
Cullen, great analysis! I agree with every point that you brought up. It is very disturbing to me that these men are able to go to whorehouses and do whatever the heck they want to while girls are shamed for being raped. They don’t even have control over losing their virginity and yet they are frowned upon! I think that the quote that you choose for your blog reflects perfectly the importance of a good appearance is in this book. Pura Vicario is teaching her children how to be socially acceptable to get a respectable wife/husband through following gender roles. Society conditions people believes into following certain standards and Pura Vicario is the epitome of the subservient woman stereotype.
“ was certain that the Vicario brothers were not as eager to carry out the sentence as to find someone who would do them the favor of stopping them.” (Marquez, page 65)
This passage is quite interesting because it plays into the essential question that the author is trying to address by creating this book. He is an investigative journalist, trying to find out who, what when and where. This being a murder case, the question of who did it is of the utmost importance. According to the first chapter it seems as if the Vicario brothers are cold blooded killers, when in reality they are humans, and here is where they are specifically humanized. So then because this information is revealed, the question of who is to blame becomes in theory more difficult to answer. Obviously the two brothers are guilty of the physical act of murdering Santiago, but were they not pushed by society? The gender roles set upon these men, tell them to be men and stand up for the honor of their family. This defense of honor forces their hands and they even attempt to make their intentions obvious in order to get the townspeople to stop them. Sadly they don’t help Santiago and he is killed. Which could put them in as much of the guilty spot as the Vicario brothers. So increasingly the question expands into a more universal question about human nature. Do humans naturally have a sense of community or is that sense of community only driven by self interest? Do the Vicario brothers have a valid excuse for committing the murder of Santiago Nasar?
I like this anaylsis very much and I especially like the idea that the Vicario brothers were forced to kill Santiago because of the gender roles of the time. It is very easy to forget that gender roles aren’t always about oppressed women, and that the men of the society may be equally as trapped in very different ways. I think the value of honor in this society that has been demonstrated throughout the book really shows how the twins did not have a choice in this murder. Indeed, they did almost everything possible to have someone stop the murder. They told everyone they encountered of their plans to murder Nasar and made it widely known. Almost everyone knew why they had to kill him too, and understood that the twins were not cold blooded killers but simply had to uphold the honor of their family and their sister. One of my favorite quotes from this book is when it describes how the Vicario brother are “off to find their sister’s lost honor”. This quote is significant to me because it shows how they thought that they were fixing a problem, but in the end they created even more problems of the moral kind, which are much harder to ignore.
Marquez uses a pair of swallows to present the marriage between Bayardo San Roman and Angela Vicario, “The Vicario family lived in a modest house with brick walls and a palm roof, topped by two attics where in January swallows got into breed” (page 44). Marquez intentionally uses January instead of October because it is spring time where animals reproduce. He also uses January to contrast with the difference in season, January is during spring which is a time of rebirth, everything start to grow again, while October is during winter which is a time of sleep (in this story represent a time of death). These images represent the murder event of Santiago Nasar, during winter, and telling the reason why Santiago is being murder, which is the failing marriage due to him having intercourse with Angela and taking her virginity away. Virginity is the most important thing to women of the time, retaining their purity is the top priority before marriage. Marquez also implies this later on with the descriptions of the pigsty owns by the Vicario family, “In the rear of the yard the twins had a pigsty, with its sacrificial stone and its disemboweling table, …” (page 44). The unique way of Marquez describing the pigsty, using the words “sacrificial”, conveying the important sense of pride. Sacrificial or sacrifice is a word use in setting such as ritual or way of paying to get something, which sounds like the death of Santiago is a retribution of him taking Angela’s purity.
“ ‘That’s not why,’ said Clotilde Armenta. ‘It’s to spare those poor boys from the horrible duty that's fallen upon them.’ ” (page 65). This quote is hysterical to think about. Armenta is talking about the boys’ feeling of guilt when they are going to murder Santiago Nasar, but why is she saying guilt when they are doing it out of their own will or is it not. The mention of the bishop coming and the celebration is being held for his coming reflects on the town people as religious, and implies that they follow the rules of Christianity, but it is ironic to see because the society the boys live in have different standard comparing to the bible. They have to uphold their family honor, which is the reason why they killed Santiago Nasar in the first place, but this goes against one of the rules in Christianity, “Thou shalt not kill”. They are pressured by their society to uphold their expectation, but at the same time they break the rule of their belief. This gives a whole new meaning in the intention of the boys, they were portrayed in earlier chapter as cold-hearted killers but now they are seen as innocent boys confuse by their society expectation and blindly doing their job in hope of honoring their family.
Chapter 2 of Chronicle of a Death Foretold reveals the double standards of the society which the novella is set in. Angela Vicario is set engaged to Bayardo San Roman, a young wealthy man who she doesn’t love. After getting married she is sent back home the day very next day after it is revealed that she is not a virgin and infact engaged in premarital sex, to an unknown man presumably Santiago Nasar. On the other hand the narrator, who is set to get married after his fiance finishes school, Luis Enrique, Cristo Boya, and Santiago Nasar attended a brothel the night of angela’s wedding festivities. This reveals they society’s shocking double standards. while a woman having premarital sex was considered taboo, Angela had it before she was even engaged to Bayardo, while the narrator had it while engaged. The narrator’s infidelity and premarital sex is only ignored because he is a man, if he were a women he most likely would’ve been shamed and had zero to little chances of being married. Angela is also made to marry Bayardo even though it’s clear she doesn’t love him, revealing she has little to no say in her own life. Bayardo’s immediate rejection of Angela shows how their relationship wasn’t based on love but most likely money and physical attraction.
Dan, you blog brings up a lot of interesting topics. First of all, I want to start with the idea that has been shared through many of the literary works we have been studying this year in english. This is the idea of double standards for men and women. In particular, this reminded me of A Doll’s House, specifically Nora and Torvald’s relationship. There are obvious differences between their marriages, like the fact that Angela and Bayardo’s marriage lasted only a few hours, while Nora and Torvald’s lasted eight years. The length however did not matter with their opinions of the marriage. Angela knew immediately that she did not want to marry Bayardo, but since she was a women, she didn’t really get a voice in her marriage. Nora didn’t know that she no longer wanted to be married to Torvald after years. Both women knew that they didn’t want to be in their relationships, but societal standards pressured them into their relationships.
Chapter 3 of Chronicle of a Death Foretold reveals the high value of honor in the setting of the novella. after finding out that Santiago Nasar took their sister’s virginity, causing her to be sent home after getting married, Pablo and Pedro Vicario plan to find and kill Santiago as for the sake of honor. When asked about the murder Pedro Vicario said “‘We killed him openly,’ Pedro Vicario said, ‘but we're innocent.’ ‘Perhaps before God,’ said Father Amador. ‘Before God and before men,’ Pablo Vicario said. ‘It was a matter of honor’ (48). The Vicario brothers commit murder in cold blood yet show no guilt or remorse due to believing they defended their honor, most likely their family or sister’s. The lack of regret is extremely notable as the Vicario brothers were generally regarded as nice men and when they confessed their intentions to murder Santiago no one believed them. They even confess they would commit murder 1000 times over in order to defend their honor. While premarital sex was looked down upon, the extent that one would go about defending the family's honor is staggering. The Vicario brothers also had no interest in Santiago’s side of the story as immediately after finding out he took their sister virginity they proceed to get tools to set about the murder.
Chapter 4 of A Chronicle of a Death Foretold describes the body after the murder and the shakily performed autopsy that was conducted on the body. This chapter continues some major themes that are seen throughout the play. Firstly, time loops back on itself. Santiago Nasar’s dogs are reintroduced. In the first chapter they had to held back from eating the rabbits innards that Victoria Guzman was preparing, and in chapter 4 Divina Flor tries and fails to hold the dogs back from eating Nasar’s dead body. She screams “Help me! What they want is to eat his guts” (73). This shows how once again time has looped back and this so-called chronicle becomes all the more complicated. Santiago’s death has come to pass and and Santiago in his white linens has become the white rabbit in the beginning whose guts were spilled and who the dogs wanted to eat. This isn’t the only significance of the guts and gore in this chapter. For much of this novel, Santiago has been described as more of an idea of a man and not an actual human being, but the butchered autopsy demonstrates how he is startlingly human. The autopsy is performed unskillfully, and is more of a “second death” than an autopsy. It is significant because it demonstrates not only the failure of the local magistrate, but also makes Santiago disgustingly human. Marquez then compares Santiago to Jesus Christ, saying that he “looked like a stigma of the crucified Christ“ (77). This is a logical parallel because both Santiago and Jesus were killed for crimes that they (probably) didn’t commit and they were both scapegoats for others wrongdoing. And like Christ, Santiago’s death and wounds are described in great detail.
Wow, your analysis was spot on and deserves the highest praise! I believe that Santiago's autopsy being so disturbingly sloppy and inconsiderate of his remains is representative of the entire process before his murder. Not only was Santaigo never warned about the attack, but the authorities were incompetent when stopping the Vicario brothers and most of the villagers were inconsiderate life.
Chapter 5 of A Chronicle of a Death Foretold does not present very much new information, but serves more to tie up loose ends and to put this story in a more literary context. This chapter introduces the magistrate who worked with this case many years prior, and he is characterized by the notes he leaves in the margin of the case report. It is obvious he believes that Santiago was innocent and that the brothers did not want to kill him, but none of this is really new information. The new information the magistrate provides is that it turns the previous events into literature. It is described how “he never thought it legitimate that life should make use of so many coincidences forbidden literature, so that there should be the untrammeled fulfillment of a death so clearly foretold” (99). This breaks the fourth wall of this novel just a little, because the previous events, while based on real life events, were fundamentally literature. It is clear that the magistrate is one who loves literature, and the events that unfolded seem almost to romantically dramatic to be true. The idea that Santiago’s death was caused by a string of unbelievable chances brings up the question of fate. This theme of fate has been developed throughout the book, and is even in the title. If his death was so “foretold” it must have been predetermined. The contradicting point is that because these interviews are being conducted 27 years after the murder and the evidence is based mostly of personal statements, that possible people are calling in the idea of fate to free them from blame. If this death was fated, they cannot be held responsible for not warning Santiago or preventing the murder in any way. He really could have and should have been saved or warned, but since he wasn’t, people describe the events as a serious of unfortunate coincidences that they had no control over to absolve themselves from guilt and blame.
In chapter 5 of Chronicles of a Death Foretold, Santiago Nasar’s murder was finally unveiled. While there was no secret that Santiago had been murdered and by who, the actual murder was finally described. Throughout the novella, there has been this guilt hanging over the entire story. Everybody in the town seemed to have even a small amount of guilt for Santiago’s murder, even though they were not the one who committed the crime. This brought up the idea questioning the guilt that the Vicario brothers actually felt for the crime they committed. Investigating the description of the crime itself will say a lot about the murders. The murder was very gruesome, “Pablo Vicario gave him a horizontal slash on the stomach, and all of his intestines exploded out of him,”(Marquez, 119). The vulgar diction alluded to the viciousness of the murder. If they just wanted to get their revenge for their sister, they could have ended his life more efficiently and less gruesome way. The diction that was chosen helps demonstrate the intensity that the twins had while they were murdering Santiago. Animal allusions are further used to characterize the twins, “Trying to finish it once and for all, Pedro Vicario sought out his heart, but he looked for it almost in the armpit, where pigs have it,” (118). The twins are not treating this as a murder, but more of a slaughter. When slaughtering an animal, people do not often take into account the animal’s feelings, they just think of themselves and their own needs. In this case, the Vicario brothers don’t see Santiago as a person, but as a pig himself. Through the viciousness and intensity of their murder, it is hard for me to believe that the Pedro and Pablo feel guilty for their actions.
“Nevertheless, in the afternoon a syrup-colored liquid began to flow from wounds, drawing flies, and a purple blotch appeared on the upper lip and spread out very slowly, like the shadow of a cloud on water, up to the hairline. His face, which had always been easy-going, took on a hostile expression, and his mother covered it with a handkerchief.” (Pg. 85)
In this passage, the autopsy of Santiago is being observed by the Narrator. In this specific scene I couldn’t help, but take note of the imagery used here. The use of sensory imagery to describe the bodily fluid being exerted from various wounds is quite graphic, and helps continue the reporting style the author is using to tell this story. Specifically the explanation of the face turning purple is a detail that would normally be overlooked, but in this style every detail about every moment is preserved so as to engage the reader. The goal of the narrators reporting is to tell a story while also presenting the situation. The detail is almost horrifying. The other part of this is that the body of the victim, Santiago, seems to be treated with little care. The face of Santiago is even to much to bear for his mother, and she covers the pain stricken face with a handkerchief. Later, after pulling the guts from the body, the priest proceeded to throw them out in the trash outside. They even summarize the autopsy with, “It was as if we killed him all over again after he was dead,” meaning they basically they carved up Santiago’s already shredded body. This should be taken note of, because it shows a disregard for death in this community. As if they seem to act like they care about Santiago, but their actions don’t seem to show it. They describe the burial without very much detail at all and that particular scene seems very rushed.
I agreed with you on the irony that the priest suppose to respect the dead, but he did the opposite through the autopsy. This is a repetitive motif as well when it comes to pride, priest suppose to respect the dead but did the autopsy which is similar to men can have sex before marriage but women cannot. I would also use other evidence such as the repetitiveness of the used word "kill" brlecause Marquez keeps using it to open these chapters which give a foreboding atmosphere. Nam Nguyen
“He was aware of the prudish disposition of his world, and he must have understood that the twins' simple nature was incapable of resisting an insult. No one knew Bayardo San Roman very well, but Santiago Nasar knew him well enough to know that underneath his worldly airs he was as subject as anyone else to his native prejudices. (Pg. 118)”
This quote occurs during another retelling of the day of the murder. Specifically it shines a light on the culturally differences seen within the book. To the reader, the whole idea around the fact that the people of this town knowing about the plotting of the murder of Santiago Naser, is absolutely crazy. This is not without legitimacy, as to many their is a civic duty to create a safe and respectable society or community. However in this passage the narrator helps convey the cultural influence behind actions. The characters within this novel know the unwritten rules of the society they live in. Santiago realizes that the Vicario brothers have a duty to uphold honor and so that is why he knows he will face something unfavorable. This also brings up the idea about fate and how, because he knows the unwritten rules behind the community he resides in at the moment, that he knows that there is no way out. People in this community seem to know that somethings are inevitable, like Santiago’s death, because of the culture of this region.
I liked your analysis and agreed with your main point. In one of my blog posts I focused on the cultural motivation behind the murder. Our posts are similar in that, specifically, we both focused on how because Angela was supposedly "dishonored " by Santiago, the Vicario brothers now have the right to take his life. I found this very strange and unlike the type of society that we live in today. This, mixed with the fact that no one told Santiago that he was going to be murdered highlights the differences in culture, between today and culture in Colombia no so long ago.
In chapter four of “Chronicles of a Death Foretold” by Gabriel Garcia Marquez, the author uses the gastric imagery to expose the theme of pride. After killing Santiago Nasar, the twins attempted to wash the blood off their clothes, “At the moment they were comforted by the honoring of having their duty, and the only thing that worried them was the persistent of the smell” (91). The twins have committed murder on an attempt to get their family’s honor back because of the shame that Santiago Nasar brought upon them when he slept with Angela Vicario. This in turn shows the reason why the brothers do not have any remorse or feeling of guilt after killing, they even treated him like an animal ready to be slaughter; a pig to be specific because the brothers killed him like one of their pigs, stated in chapter five. This is also one of their pride as butchers, they kill Santiago by using the same knives they used to kill their pig as well as striking him using their knowledge of pig’s anatomy. This stay consistent with the atmosphere of the book which is foreboding. Every details the author mentions give off a shuddering feeling because of how the brothers acted, monster-like. Nam Nguyen
I don't want to pull an Eirik but I have to say I completely and UTTERLY disagree with everything you said. You claim that the brothers don't feel remorse or guilt towards what they have done, which is KILLING another person. You claim that the only thing that worries them about the blood is the persistent smell that doesn't go away, well they tried to wash it many times as indicated in pages 78-80 "They asked for lots of water, laundry soap, and rags, and they washed the blood from their arms and faces, and they also washed their shirts" and after all that work the smell was probably gone and the fact that no one else was claiming that the smell wouldn't go away proves that the smell was in their head and there was no smell. Also in chapter 4 the brothers claim that everything smelled of Nasar, this and the fact that the were stuck with the smell of the blood and couldn't get rid of it indicates that there is NO blood and the all they are smelling is their guilty conscious and the fact that they are feeling guilt and remorse towards what they have done which is kill an innocent man. Also in chapter 4 the couldn't sleep in the jail cell, because, again, they felt guilty. Also you claimed that because they are butchers and have killed before they are used to blood and that is why it was so easy for them to kill and not feel bad about it, but the evidence on chapter 4 pages 78-80 clearly indicate that they couldn't rest and sleep because they were feeling guilt towards their actions. So yeah, I didn't want to say anything but I had to say something because you are very wrong, sorry. With love, your favorite class mate Hajir
‘The cocks of dawn would catch us trying to give order to the chain of many chance events that had made absurdity possible,...” (113). The animal imagery that Marquez used to represent fate here are the cocks. Usually the rooster is an animal many authors use in story to tell that it is the beginning of the day, when they are crowing, and when Marquez uses this, he is starting the horrid day of Santiago’s Death. This keeps the foreboding atmosphere of the story, ominous feeling and chill-down-the-spine. Another reasons why the author uses this symbol as a representation of fate is that it occurs at the beginning of the book and at the end and that it is the ultimate plan, and not can stop it. The people and other things that exist to intervenes, in the plan, are all chess pieces that is commanded by fate, who is the player in this case, to finish what has been started. They fall into places, no matter what the circumstances, proven by the act of the paper note under the door. “He went in without seeing the paper on the floor”( 123-124). The paper was an obvious warning of Santiago Death, people intervene with fate to prevent Santiago, but then people choose to be neglectful and leave it up to fate. Human intertwine with fate, but it is all planned out, no matter what fate wins. Nam Nguyen
"Everything continued smelling of Santiago Nasar that day... They asked for lots of water, laundry soap, and rags, and they washed the blood from their arms and faces, and they also washed their shirts, but they couldn't get any rest." chapter 4, pages 78-80
The blood in this quote is a symbol of guilt and human conscience. They are doing everything they can to get rid of the blood (smell) but it doesn't go away. The blood symbolizes their guilty conscience and the face that no matter how much they try to wash it away and forget it, they will still have to endure the consequences of their actions. "They'd gone three nights without sleep." The smell of the blood not only represents guilt but is also a form of punishment. As shown in the quote above the smell of the blood prevents them from falling asleep. The brothers know that they have done something terrible and regret it, since no one else smells the blood, it shows that the brothers are having mental issues and are struggling to come in terms with their guilty consciences. Also in chapter four there is a quote about how the whole town smelled of Nasar's blood, this symbolizes the whole towns involvement and fault in the murder and how they are all guilty. -Hajir Hosseini, chapter 4 blog
I agreed with you on the blood symbolizes their remorse for the murder of Santiago, but do you think this is ironic or should I say funny? The author investigated the case after decades, and I am pretty sure that it could be made up so the boys seem innocent. The reasons why I thought this is because the simple matters of pride within the town. Nobody cares to even warn Santiago, because he had done something to hurt another's pride and that is probably why no one care. They did not care because in the town it was also taboo to damage another family or person reputation, and that they would probably wanted Santiago death as well. Nam Nguyen P.S- Why would you roast me of all people?
In chapter 4 of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, the action focuses on the aftermath of Santiago’s murder. At the beginning of the chapter there was an autopsy performed on Santiago’s corpse. This autopsy results were unpleasant , “ he only had a few years of life left to him in any case,” (Marquez 76). Even though he had been murdered for his alleged crime, he was not predicted to have a long life. It’s ironic how no matter the choices he made, he was destined to have a similar outcome. It could be fate. Everyone has a set plan, regardless of their actions or the actions that affect their lives. Life manages to work itself out. This is also seen through Angela, “She was reborn. ‘I went crazy over him.’” (92). When first confronted with the idea to marry Bayardo San Ramon, Angela was not intrigued at all. She infact had no interest in him at all. Yet 23 years later, she is intoxicated with the idea of him. This is also ironic, how Angela’s feeling changed over time. Another thing that is ironic in this chapter is the idea of death. This chapter begins with the autopsy of Santiago’s body, and then continues the theme with the idea of Santiago’s scent. Then the chapter jumps ahead in time and discovers Angela’s new passion for Bayardo. It is almost a rebirth in a way. That Angela and Bayardo’s relationship is being reborn threw the ashes of Santiago’s death.
"They didn't hear the shouts of the whole town, frightened by its own crime." chapter 5
The whole plot of the book Chronicles of a death foretold is about a murder that took place and who is to be blamed for it and why even though a lot of people knew about the dangers surrounding the victim why did no one do anything to prevent it. The main theme of this story is who is to be blamed for the murder of Nasar. That question can be answered by this quote. The whole town is to be blamed for his death. Gabriel Garcia Marquez not only mentions this in chapter 5 in this quote he also uses blood and the symbolism that it represents which is the guilt that people carry because they know they have fault in the death of Nasar. Gabriel Garcia Marquez really tries to convey his message of how humans should not be oblivious to the problems around them and should act upon it even if no one else does. He tries to convey the message that not doing anything about an issue and then blaming others for not doing anything is wrong, he also bashes the idea of society blaming their mistakes and actions on faith and a higher being. Most people didn't do anything because they thought it was meant for him to die and it was his fate so they should not interfere, and that is what he is trying to convey to the readers and warn them about the dangers of ignorance. -Hajir Hosseini, chapter 5 blog
Hajir I enjoyed the commentary you made. The idea that indifference is a sin in the world of Chronicles of a Death Foretold is ever present. It reminds me of lessons we learn from historical events such as the holocaust or the Armenian Genocide, where indifference aids the oppressors. I guess the overall message trying to be conveyed to people is, that as a people in a functioning society we have a duty. That duty is to help however we can, make society better. The word better is obviously subjective, so ultimately it would be better to say, in order to make the society cooperative, prosperous, and peaceful. These three things seem to be universally desired. As humans we have a duty to ourselves and others to partake in this social contract and I believe this is what Marquez wants the reader to realize. That he or she has a civic duty to uphold. Perhaps even a duty as a human being.
In chapter 4,the body of Santiago Nasar is described. It is described in great detail and continuously shown to displayed for the audience. An example of the vivid imagery while describing the body includes, “In the afternoon a syrup colored liquid begin to flow from the wounds, drawing flies, and a purple blotch appeared on the upper lip and spread out very slowly, like a shadow of a cloud on water, up to the hairline”(74). The depiction of body is vivid and used to make the reader uncomfortable. To get to such a state santiago’s body would need to have been left out for a long period of time. This shows how even when the townsfolk couldn’t save Santiago Nasar, they still can’t treat him with decency and let his body rot. The disturbing scene that is Santiago’s body shows how bad the situation Nasar was in. The narrator first introduces the malodor when he says, “In addition, the dogs, aroused by the smell of death, increased the uneasiness”(73). The smell shows just how much of an impact the death of Santiago had on the town. They could not escape the lingering scent of his body like they couldn’t escape his death.
Chapter 5 reveals how Angela’s life, while almost never talked about, is somewhat tragic in its own way. Angela’s feeling aren’t considered at all by many. After returning home from Bayardo San Ramon’s, after he finds out she’s not a virgin her mother doesn’t ask her for her feelings in the matter but swiftly beats her. When the Vicario brothers set out to kill Santiago they don’t ask or seem to care about her opinion on whether Santiago should live or die. Angela and Santiago’s relationship could be that of lovers yet her family does not care when it comes to their honor. Angela’s opinions or actions do not matter much to the Vicario’s except when they could have negative impacts on the family’s honour most likely because she is a woman. It is revealed that Angela did in fact grow close to Bayardo, and wrote him weekly letters for seventeen years, without a single response. No one seems to care much about her feelings of condition, they view Bayardo as a tragic figure. When Bayardo does come to visit her he comes with clothes to embroider and her unopened letters. Though it’s revealed she loves Bayardo it reveals that he doesn’t care enough about her to read the letters. What’s shocking is that Angela did not cheat on Bayardo yet she’s still seen as a villain to him. Even though she cared enough to write to him he only visited her so she could do her her job as an embroiderer.
Your analyzation is well thought out and I appreciate the comments you make. I agree that Angela is not at all listened to by many characters in the book. I think it is part of Marquez’s commentary on how women are treated in society. No one listens to her side of the story and she is blamed immediately for engaging in premarital sex. She has to bear the weight of an action that was not purely her action. No man is expected to come forward and she faces the brutal discipline of her husband and mother. Your analyzation also brings up a more generally seen aspect of the story I’ve noticed. No one seems to care about anyone really at all. When the autopsy of Santiago takes place they describe the procedure as if they take little to no care in performing the task. It isn't surprising though, considering the reason he died in the first place was that the people of the twon did not warn him.
In chapter one of A Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez creates dramatic irony and an air of missed opportunities while referencing clairvoyance and fantasy. The first chapter follows the story of the death of Santiago Nasar from the perspective of the narrator with a few supplemental interviews that were conducted 27 years after the event. The narrator of this story is an unnamed son of Luisa Santiaga. It is written as a first person narrative, but it has instances where it is similar to a third-person omniscient point of view, because it seems as though the narrator knows what everyone was thinking. This could partly be true due to the interviews he conducted with the witnesses after the event, but the writing style makes it seem like he can see into their minds.
ReplyDeleteThe first chapter of this chronicle introduces an aspect of the fantastical which helps establish this novel as part of the genre of magical realism. Santiago’s mother had “a well-earned reputation as an accurate interpreter of other people’s dreams” (Marquez 4), however in this instance she “hadn’t noticed any ominous augury in those two dreams of her son’s” (4). This shows that in general, Placida Linero, Santiago’s mother, was believed to be able to interpret dreams, but in this instance she does not see anything wrong with her son's dream, even though everyone already knew he was going to die. This displays a shortcoming of the fantastical. Even though shortcomings of the fantastical are present in this book, this book does not disrespect the fantastical, and in a manner inherent to magical realism, presents it in a reasonable way.
Another aspect of the fantastical in chapter one was “The Fatal Door” (12), and how it seemed that everything was predetermined. The author’s style in this novel also reflects this idea. The first sentence of the book reveals that Nasar will die, which makes it seem as though it was predetermined by fate. This idea of fate and predetermined destiny will be further examined in later chapters.
In the book "Chronicle of a Death Foretold" by Gabriel Garcia Márquez, the author uses animal imagery to show an ironic theme while creating the dominant effect of apathy.
ReplyDeleteIn chapter one, the author uses the image of a rooster crow to foreshadow the death of Santiago Nasar, " 'Then the boat stopped tooting and the cocks began to grow,' she told me" (page14). In books, authors usually use the image of a rooster crow as a measurement of time in the story. In nature, roosters crow all the time to warn other chickens of coming dangers. In this particular novel, the author choice of using this image as a foreshadow to warn readers of the coming murders. This image is also a way the author shows apathy in the citizens of the town. Every time the author mentions this image, the citizens are celebrating the coming of the bishop. This implies the people of the town as religious, but the irony comes with this is the fact that they break one of the ten commandments, "Thou shalt not kill", indirectly; they are not involve in the murder but still is responsible because they did not report the warning to the authority.
-Nam Nguye
“Nevertheless, no sooner had she heard the news then she put on her high-heeled shoes and the church shawl she only wore for visits of condolence. My father, who had heard everything from his bed, appeared in the dining room in his pajamas and asked in alarm where she was going. "To warn my dear friend Plácida," she answered. "It isn't right that everybody should know that they're going to kill her son and she the only one who doesn't." "We've got the same ties to the Vicario's that we do with her," my father said. "You always have to take the side of the dead," she said.” (1.42)
ReplyDeleteThis passage is odd, because it depicts the moments before Santiago Nasar's is murdered. Most of the story at this point has been centered around his death and this specific passage shines light on the key question most readers ask at this point. Why does the mother of the narrator go to his mom to warn her? Wouldn’t it be more prudent to go to Santiago to warn him? The line, “It isn't right that everybody should know that they're going to kill her son and she the only one who doesn't” (1.42). Puts into perspective the irony of the situation. They seem to act like they really care about this death and that it truly affects them, but in reality it seems that for some reason they don’t care about him dying. The sentence should include he instead of she, because they should be telling Santiago. The reason they feel this way deep down is unknown, but perhaps it’s that these people are afraid of the Vicario brothers or that they are just too lazy to get involved in any conflict. Maybe even Santiago has done things in his past to provoke them or that have been seen as unfavorable to the community. whatever the case it seems to be an overreaction to the situation. To let someone die as they seem to be doing, is as bad as killing them. Indifference is a sin to humanity. There is a large amount of faith put in the believe that he has a fate to be fulfilled, at least form the background knowledge given to the class before hand and the passage seems to confirm this theme.
In chapter 1 of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, life and death are symbolized through the clothes of of Santiago Nasar and the Vicario brothers. Santiago wears all white, a symbol for life while the Vicario brothers wear all black, a symbol for death. Throughout the entire first chapter while many of the book's characters are aware of Santiago’s eventual demise, Santiago himself isn't. In fact he has a rather positive attitude about the day. Santiago carries an air of positivity with him and has no idea that he’s going to die. His clothes symbolize the fresh life he has ahead of him, he’s an educated young man who's going to be running a ranch. Santiago clearly has a promising life ahead of him, that he is unaware will be snuffed out. This is somewhat ironic as one would expect Santiago, who is set die to be wearing clothes symbolic of death, as a means of foreshadowing and mood setting. Instead the use of white clothes contributes to characterization and juxtaposition to the Vicario brothers. The Vicario brothers, wear all black to symbolize their roles as death dealers. Black is synonymous with death, it’s dealers, and it’s harbingers. The all black ensemble of the Vicario brothers make them reminiscent of the grim reaper. A possible reason that the Vicario’s assault Santiago is due to believing that he took their sister, Margot’s, virginity prior to her marriage. This causes her to be sent home after her marriage, which is akin to robbing her of future life. This motivates the Vicarios to take Santiago's life as retribution.
ReplyDeleteThe first chapter of Chronicles of a Death Foretold, by Gabriel Garcia Marquez, describes the day that Santiago Nasar was murdered, 27 years prior. Santiago Nasar is a young owner of a small ranch and seems to be doing well for himself. Marquez characterized him in the opening pages of the book as open and optimistic person even with the struggles that he has had in his life, “ By his nature, Santiago Nasar was merry and peaceful and open hearted,” (Marquez 8). Santiago was characterized as a friendly person, that makes me wonder why someone would murder him, and why no he had gotten no warning. The entire town knew of the twins plans to murder Santiago, yet people had normal interactions with him on the day of his murder and didn’t mention a thing. This could be because of the bishop visiting the town. The bishop's arrival was a distraction to the town, “ There were a lot of people at the dock, in addition to the authorities and the school children, and everywhere one can see crates of well-fattened roosters they were bearing as a gift to the bishop,” (16). It’s a possibility that a warning didn’t get to Santiago because of the bishop coming to town. It is also ironic that Santiago was murdered on this day, because the bishop was visiting. Murder directly goes against bishop’s religion. Him not getting off of the boat to visit the town could also foreshadow Santiago’s death. This could maybe be about how the bishop couldn’t greet the town because of the murder and lies that take place there.
ReplyDeleteI agree that somebody should have warned that poor idiot, but I believe that Nasar was not the “merry and peaceful” man he is initially characterized as. Sure he is rich and good looking, but he sexually assaults his servant girl and “grabs her whole pussy”. Yikes! I think that Marquez presents all of his characters with some redeemable qualities and some obvious flaws to create the idea that nobody is completely absolved of blame for the crime that will occur, but also that nobody is completely guilty for Nasar’s murder. Every character is described with obvious flaws, like molesting your servant girl and sleeping with prostitutes, and obvious good qualities, like being a nice fiance and being overall “open hearted”. I think this may also be a comment on human nature; no matter how great of a person someone is, they’ve still done some weird stuff that people mostly ignore. Still the always angry feminist in me finds it really hard to forgive molesting someone whose name is “Divina Flor”. I mean divine flower! How much more pure can you get!
DeleteAngela’s confession at the end of chapter two of “Chronicle of a Death Foretold” reveals the motive of the murder of Santiago Nasar and helps establish the idea that each character is partly to blame for this crime. In this novel there are no simple condemnations, and instead every character is flawed and complicated. Marquez characterizes the people in this story with obvious imperfections, which help support the idea that everyone shares some portion of the blame.
ReplyDeleteThe most significant plot point in the second chapter is Angela revealing that it was Santiago Nasar who took her virginity. It described how, “She took only the time necessary to say the name. She looked for it in the shadows, she found it at first sight among many, many easily confused names from this world and the other, and she nailed it to the wall with her well-aimed dart, like a butterfly with no will whose sentence has always been written.” (Marquez 47). This quote is significant in a number of ways.
Firstly, it alludes to the supernatural and the idea of fate. It describes “this world and the other” which adds an aspect of the supernatural to this passage. This further puts this novel into the genre of magical realism. Additionally, this passage references fate when it says “with no will whose sentence has always been written.” This creates the idea that the events that occurred in this novel were all predetermined and were caused by fate instead of free will. This absolves the characters of some blame. This passage also alludes to the manner in which Nasar will be killed. It describes him as “like a butterfly” pinned to a wall, which actually occurs later when he is killed on his front door and literally pinned to a wall. This foreshadowing characterizes him as helpless in the hands of fate.
Finally, this passage reveals Santiago’s likely innocence. Angela “looked for [his name] in the shadows” and describes how any man's name would have sufficed. This can support the idea that all men share the blame for what follows because of the patriarchal society that values her only for her virginity.
In chapter three of A Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Marquez showcases the patriarchal views of society, specifically in the value placed on female virginity. In chapter 3 it is discussed how the men in the novel have slept around with prostitutes, specifically “the most serviceable in bed” (64), Maria Alejandrina Cervantes. The narrator describes her as “the most elegant and the most tender woman I have ever known” (64) and goes on to describe how “it was she who did away with my generation’s virginity” (65). This quote obviously refers to the men of this generation.
ReplyDeleteThe idea of purity linked to abstaining from premarital sex is obviously only applicable to women in this society. Angela is returned from her husband’s bed and beaten nearly to death by her mother for committing the same “wrongs” that were completely acceptable when committed by the men. Santiago Nasar and Pablo Vicario are both described as having premarital sex and engaging in frequent sexual relations with the prostitutes of the town. Prostitutes are even provided as a service at the wedding, and it described how “They’d been working without cease for three days, first taking care of the guests of honor in secret then turned loose, the doors wide open for those of us still unsated by the wedding bash” (64). This compares the girls to wedding entertainment to be utilized when one was bored. Talk about sexism!
And this idea of virginity being “pure” brings into question if any character in this novel is really pure. Every character presented has secrets and weaknesses, so this standard of complete purity is obviously ridiculous. I think Marquez was criticizing the idea of virginity as the symbol of female purity, and that this standard demonstrates how this society did not fundamentally understand the idea of a human being as an innately flawed creature. This unrealistic value placed on female virginity eventually leads to an unnatural murder.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn chapter two of A Chronicle of a Death Foretold, the reader is let into the culture of arranged marriages and pride in wealth. Marquez tells the story of a young girl, Angela Vicario, who is assigned by her parents to marry a rich strange man that she has never met. Women in this culture have little to no freedom, especially when dealing with marriage and their future. They are treated as possessions instead of people. Marquez introduces Bayardo San Roman in chapter two and characterizes him as a very wealthy and selfish man, though the whole family only sees him for his popularity and bright future. Roman attempts to woo the family and makes an effort to impress his future wife, making him a more appealing husband to her family. This proves how powerless women are as their whole life is planned around them without them ever having a say. Bayardo San Roman repeatedly shows off his wealth both to prove to the family and the rest of society how important he is. When told about the cost of the wedding, Marquez writes, “Bayardo San Roman, on the other hand, took it very graciously and even with a certain pride. ‘“Almost,”’ he said, “’but we’re only beginning. When it’s all over it will be twice that, more or less” (Marquez 43). It is common in these societies to show off wealth and Roman went to extravagant measures to prove this because this not only reflects his image, but the family’s image as well. Women must put up with the behavior of the man no matter what. An example of this is when Angela says, “’I would have been happy even if he hadn’t come, but never if he had abandoned me dressed up.’” Her caution seemed natural, because there was no public misfortune more shameful than for a woman to be jilted in her bridal gown” (Marquez 41). Again, this is about keeping up appearances and women concerned about society’s expectations. This event applies to many women across the globe and shows what they go through daily. This gives the reader knowledge about the society they live in and a better understanding of the characters and setting in general.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI really like your analysis! It's spot on and hits all the points in my opinion. Angela's situation is very symbolic to that of women in the Colombian society but also that of women in the early 1900s. Many women like Angela didn't make their own decisions and were used to keep up appearances, like women in may cultures around the world. Angela is also representative of her families honor, since when she is "sullied" by having her virginity taken away, the Vicario brothers see this as sullying their families honor.
Delete“The boys were brought up to be men. The girls had been reared to get married…‘They’re perfect,’ she was frequently heard to say. ‘Any man will be happy with them because they’ve been raised to suffer.’” (Marquez, page 34)
ReplyDeleteThis chapter tries to put the previous in context with the background on some of the characters and the cause for Santiago’s death. This specific piece of the chapter explains the obvious gender roles shackling the characters, and mostly the women in the story. Women have a lot expected of them at this time, and one of those things expected is virginity. Premarital sex is not something that is largely approved of and this is largely due to the Catholic influence in Colombia where the book takes place. So the idea that women are good for marriage only, helps the reader understand the predicament that she is in when the new husband finds that she is not a virgin and the Santiago is the man who has taken her virginity. Societal norms have now put Santiago in a precarious state where he may be now at risk because of his actions that go against traditional catholicism. It is also very funny how she is treated after the husband and mother find out she is not a virgin, because they scorn her severely. While she is punished for her negligence, the men including Santiago are having their fun at a whorehouse. The hypocrisy of that is seen in the quote above with the line, “because they’ve been raised to suffer.” This points at the inequality and hypocrisy in their believes. It also adds to the darkness that shrouds the story around the story.
Cullen, great analysis! I agree with every point that you brought up. It is very disturbing to me that these men are able to go to whorehouses and do whatever the heck they want to while girls are shamed for being raped. They don’t even have control over losing their virginity and yet they are frowned upon! I think that the quote that you choose for your blog reflects perfectly the importance of a good appearance is in this book. Pura Vicario is teaching her children how to be socially acceptable to get a respectable wife/husband through following gender roles. Society conditions people believes into following certain standards and Pura Vicario is the epitome of the subservient woman stereotype.
Delete“ was certain that the Vicario brothers were not as eager to carry out the sentence as to find someone who would do them the favor of stopping them.” (Marquez, page 65)
ReplyDeleteThis passage is quite interesting because it plays into the essential question that the author is trying to address by creating this book. He is an investigative journalist, trying to find out who, what when and where. This being a murder case, the question of who did it is of the utmost importance. According to the first chapter it seems as if the Vicario brothers are cold blooded killers, when in reality they are humans, and here is where they are specifically humanized. So then because this information is revealed, the question of who is to blame becomes in theory more difficult to answer. Obviously the two brothers are guilty of the physical act of murdering Santiago, but were they not pushed by society? The gender roles set upon these men, tell them to be men and stand up for the honor of their family. This defense of honor forces their hands and they even attempt to make their intentions obvious in order to get the townspeople to stop them. Sadly they don’t help Santiago and he is killed. Which could put them in as much of the guilty spot as the Vicario brothers. So increasingly the question expands into a more universal question about human nature. Do humans naturally have a sense of community or is that sense of community only driven by self interest? Do the Vicario brothers have a valid excuse for committing the murder of Santiago Nasar?
I like this anaylsis very much and I especially like the idea that the Vicario brothers were forced to kill Santiago because of the gender roles of the time. It is very easy to forget that gender roles aren’t always about oppressed women, and that the men of the society may be equally as trapped in very different ways. I think the value of honor in this society that has been demonstrated throughout the book really shows how the twins did not have a choice in this murder. Indeed, they did almost everything possible to have someone stop the murder. They told everyone they encountered of their plans to murder Nasar and made it widely known. Almost everyone knew why they had to kill him too, and understood that the twins were not cold blooded killers but simply had to uphold the honor of their family and their sister. One of my favorite quotes from this book is when it describes how the Vicario brother are “off to find their sister’s lost honor”. This quote is significant to me because it shows how they thought that they were fixing a problem, but in the end they created even more problems of the moral kind, which are much harder to ignore.
DeleteMarquez uses a pair of swallows to present the marriage between Bayardo San Roman and Angela Vicario, “The Vicario family lived in a modest house with brick walls and a palm roof, topped by two attics where in January swallows got into breed” (page 44). Marquez intentionally uses January instead of October because it is spring time where animals reproduce. He also uses January to contrast with the difference in season, January is during spring which is a time of rebirth, everything start to grow again, while October is during winter which is a time of sleep (in this story represent a time of death). These images represent the murder event of Santiago Nasar, during winter, and telling the reason why Santiago is being murder, which is the failing marriage due to him having intercourse with Angela and taking her virginity away. Virginity is the most important thing to women of the time, retaining their purity is the top priority before marriage. Marquez also implies this later on with the descriptions of the pigsty owns by the Vicario family, “In the rear of the yard the twins had a pigsty, with its sacrificial stone and its disemboweling table, …” (page 44). The unique way of Marquez describing the pigsty, using the words “sacrificial”, conveying the important sense of pride. Sacrificial or sacrifice is a word use in setting such as ritual or way of paying to get something, which sounds like the death of Santiago is a retribution of him taking Angela’s purity.
ReplyDeleteI'm posting this for Nam
Delete“ ‘That’s not why,’ said Clotilde Armenta. ‘It’s to spare those poor boys from the horrible duty that's fallen upon them.’ ” (page 65). This quote is hysterical to think about. Armenta is talking about the boys’ feeling of guilt when they are going to murder Santiago Nasar, but why is she saying guilt when they are doing it out of their own will or is it not. The mention of the bishop coming and the celebration is being held for his coming reflects on the town people as religious, and implies that they follow the rules of Christianity, but it is ironic to see because the society the boys live in have different standard comparing to the bible. They have to uphold their family honor, which is the reason why they killed Santiago Nasar in the first place, but this goes against one of the rules in Christianity, “Thou shalt not kill”. They are pressured by their society to uphold their expectation, but at the same time they break the rule of their belief. This gives a whole new meaning in the intention of the boys, they were portrayed in earlier chapter as cold-hearted killers but now they are seen as innocent boys confuse by their society expectation and blindly doing their job in hope of honoring their family.
ReplyDeleteNam Nguyen
DeleteChapter 2 of Chronicle of a Death Foretold reveals the double standards of the society which the novella is set in. Angela Vicario is set engaged to Bayardo San Roman, a young wealthy man who she doesn’t love. After getting married she is sent back home the day very next day after it is revealed that she is not a virgin and infact engaged in premarital sex, to an unknown man presumably Santiago Nasar. On the other hand the narrator, who is set to get married after his fiance finishes school, Luis Enrique, Cristo Boya, and Santiago Nasar attended a brothel the night of angela’s wedding festivities. This reveals they society’s shocking double standards. while a woman having premarital sex was considered taboo, Angela had it before she was even engaged to Bayardo, while the narrator had it while engaged. The narrator’s infidelity and premarital sex is only ignored because he is a man, if he were a women he most likely would’ve been shamed and had zero to little chances of being married. Angela is also made to marry Bayardo even though it’s clear she doesn’t love him, revealing she has little to no say in her own life. Bayardo’s immediate rejection of Angela shows how their relationship wasn’t based on love but most likely money and physical attraction.
ReplyDeleteDan, you blog brings up a lot of interesting topics. First of all, I want to start with the idea that has been shared through many of the literary works we have been studying this year in english. This is the idea of double standards for men and women. In particular, this reminded me of A Doll’s House, specifically Nora and Torvald’s relationship. There are obvious differences between their marriages, like the fact that Angela and Bayardo’s marriage lasted only a few hours, while Nora and Torvald’s lasted eight years. The length however did not matter with their opinions of the marriage. Angela knew immediately that she did not want to marry Bayardo, but since she was a women, she didn’t really get a voice in her marriage. Nora didn’t know that she no longer wanted to be married to Torvald after years. Both women knew that they didn’t want to be in their relationships, but societal standards pressured them into their relationships.
DeleteChapter 3 of Chronicle of a Death Foretold reveals the high value of honor in the setting of the novella. after finding out that Santiago Nasar took their sister’s virginity, causing her to be sent home after getting married, Pablo and Pedro Vicario plan to find and kill Santiago as for the sake of honor. When asked about the murder Pedro Vicario said “‘We killed him openly,’ Pedro Vicario said, ‘but we're innocent.’ ‘Perhaps before God,’ said Father Amador. ‘Before God and before men,’ Pablo Vicario said. ‘It was a matter of honor’ (48). The Vicario brothers commit murder in cold blood yet show no guilt or remorse due to believing they defended their honor, most likely their family or sister’s. The lack of regret is extremely notable as the Vicario brothers were generally regarded as nice men and when they confessed their intentions to murder Santiago no one believed them. They even confess they would commit murder 1000 times over in order to defend their honor. While premarital sex was looked down upon, the extent that one would go about defending the family's honor is staggering. The Vicario brothers also had no interest in Santiago’s side of the story as immediately after finding out he took their sister virginity they proceed to get tools to set about the murder.
ReplyDeleteChapter 4 of A Chronicle of a Death Foretold describes the body after the murder and the shakily performed autopsy that was conducted on the body. This chapter continues some major themes that are seen throughout the play.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, time loops back on itself. Santiago Nasar’s dogs are reintroduced. In the first chapter they had to held back from eating the rabbits innards that Victoria Guzman was preparing, and in chapter 4 Divina Flor tries and fails to hold the dogs back from eating Nasar’s dead body. She screams “Help me! What they want is to eat his guts” (73). This shows how once again time has looped back and this so-called chronicle becomes all the more complicated. Santiago’s death has come to pass and and Santiago in his white linens has become the white rabbit in the beginning whose guts were spilled and who the dogs wanted to eat.
This isn’t the only significance of the guts and gore in this chapter. For much of this novel, Santiago has been described as more of an idea of a man and not an actual human being, but the butchered autopsy demonstrates how he is startlingly human. The autopsy is performed unskillfully, and is more of a “second death” than an autopsy. It is significant because it demonstrates not only the failure of the local magistrate, but also makes Santiago disgustingly human.
Marquez then compares Santiago to Jesus Christ, saying that he “looked like a stigma of the crucified Christ“ (77). This is a logical parallel because both Santiago and Jesus were killed for crimes that they (probably) didn’t commit and they were both scapegoats for others wrongdoing. And like Christ, Santiago’s death and wounds are described in great detail.
Wow, your analysis was spot on and deserves the highest praise! I believe that Santiago's autopsy being so disturbingly sloppy and inconsiderate of his remains is representative of the entire process before his murder. Not only was Santaigo never warned about the attack, but the authorities were incompetent when stopping the Vicario brothers and most of the villagers were inconsiderate life.
DeleteChapter 5 of A Chronicle of a Death Foretold does not present very much new information, but serves more to tie up loose ends and to put this story in a more literary context. This chapter introduces the magistrate who worked with this case many years prior, and he is characterized by the notes he leaves in the margin of the case report.
ReplyDeleteIt is obvious he believes that Santiago was innocent and that the brothers did not want to kill him, but none of this is really new information. The new information the magistrate provides is that it turns the previous events into literature. It is described how “he never thought it legitimate that life should make use of so many coincidences forbidden literature, so that there should be the untrammeled fulfillment of a death so clearly foretold” (99). This breaks the fourth wall of this novel just a little, because the previous events, while based on real life events, were fundamentally literature. It is clear that the magistrate is one who loves literature, and the events that unfolded seem almost to romantically dramatic to be true.
The idea that Santiago’s death was caused by a string of unbelievable chances brings up the question of fate. This theme of fate has been developed throughout the book, and is even in the title. If his death was so “foretold” it must have been predetermined.
The contradicting point is that because these interviews are being conducted 27 years after the murder and the evidence is based mostly of personal statements, that possible people are calling in the idea of fate to free them from blame. If this death was fated, they cannot be held responsible for not warning Santiago or preventing the murder in any way. He really could have and should have been saved or warned, but since he wasn’t, people describe the events as a serious of unfortunate coincidences that they had no control over to absolve themselves from guilt and blame.
In chapter 5 of Chronicles of a Death Foretold, Santiago Nasar’s murder was finally unveiled. While there was no secret that Santiago had been murdered and by who, the actual murder was finally described. Throughout the novella, there has been this guilt hanging over the entire story. Everybody in the town seemed to have even a small amount of guilt for Santiago’s murder, even though they were not the one who committed the crime. This brought up the idea questioning the guilt that the Vicario brothers actually felt for the crime they committed. Investigating the description of the crime itself will say a lot about the murders. The murder was very gruesome, “Pablo Vicario gave him a horizontal slash on the stomach, and all of his intestines exploded out of him,”(Marquez, 119). The vulgar diction alluded to the viciousness of the murder. If they just wanted to get their revenge for their sister, they could have ended his life more efficiently and less gruesome way. The diction that was chosen helps demonstrate the intensity that the twins had while they were murdering Santiago. Animal allusions are further used to characterize the twins, “Trying to finish it once and for all, Pedro Vicario sought out his heart, but he looked for it almost in the armpit, where pigs have it,” (118). The twins are not treating this as a murder, but more of a slaughter. When slaughtering an animal, people do not often take into account the animal’s feelings, they just think of themselves and their own needs. In this case, the Vicario brothers don’t see Santiago as a person, but as a pig himself. Through the viciousness and intensity of their murder, it is hard for me to believe that the Pedro and Pablo feel guilty for their actions.
ReplyDelete“Nevertheless, in the afternoon a syrup-colored liquid began to flow from wounds, drawing flies, and a purple blotch appeared on the upper lip and spread out very slowly, like the shadow of a cloud on water, up to the hairline. His face, which had always been easy-going, took on a hostile expression, and his mother covered it with a handkerchief.” (Pg. 85)
ReplyDeleteIn this passage, the autopsy of Santiago is being observed by the Narrator. In this specific scene I couldn’t help, but take note of the imagery used here. The use of sensory imagery to describe the bodily fluid being exerted from various wounds is quite graphic, and helps continue the reporting style the author is using to tell this story. Specifically the explanation of the face turning purple is a detail that would normally be overlooked, but in this style every detail about every moment is preserved so as to engage the reader. The goal of the narrators reporting is to tell a story while also presenting the situation. The detail is almost horrifying. The other part of this is that the body of the victim, Santiago, seems to be treated with little care. The face of Santiago is even to much to bear for his mother, and she covers the pain stricken face with a handkerchief. Later, after pulling the guts from the body, the priest proceeded to throw them out in the trash outside. They even summarize the autopsy with, “It was as if we killed him all over again after he was dead,” meaning they basically they carved up Santiago’s already shredded body. This should be taken note of, because it shows a disregard for death in this community. As if they seem to act like they care about Santiago, but their actions don’t seem to show it. They describe the burial without very much detail at all and that particular scene seems very rushed.
I agreed with you on the irony that the priest suppose to respect the dead, but he did the opposite through the autopsy. This is a repetitive motif as well when it comes to pride, priest suppose to respect the dead but did the autopsy which is similar to men can have sex before marriage but women cannot. I would also use other evidence such as the repetitiveness of the used word "kill" brlecause Marquez keeps using it to open these chapters which give a foreboding atmosphere.
DeleteNam Nguyen
“He was aware of the prudish disposition of his world, and he must have understood that the twins' simple nature was incapable of resisting an insult. No one knew Bayardo San Roman very well, but Santiago Nasar knew him well enough to know that underneath his worldly airs he was as subject as anyone else to his native prejudices. (Pg. 118)”
ReplyDeleteThis quote occurs during another retelling of the day of the murder. Specifically it shines a light on the culturally differences seen within the book. To the reader, the whole idea around the fact that the people of this town knowing about the plotting of the murder of Santiago Naser, is absolutely crazy. This is not without legitimacy, as to many their is a civic duty to create a safe and respectable society or community. However in this passage the narrator helps convey the cultural influence behind actions. The characters within this novel know the unwritten rules of the society they live in. Santiago realizes that the Vicario brothers have a duty to uphold honor and so that is why he knows he will face something unfavorable. This also brings up the idea about fate and how, because he knows the unwritten rules behind the community he resides in at the moment, that he knows that there is no way out. People in this community seem to know that somethings are inevitable, like Santiago’s death, because of the culture of this region.
I liked your analysis and agreed with your main point. In one of my blog posts I focused on the cultural motivation behind the murder. Our posts are similar in that, specifically, we both focused on how because Angela was supposedly "dishonored " by Santiago, the Vicario brothers now have the right to take his life. I found this very strange and unlike the type of society that we live in today. This, mixed with the fact that no one told Santiago that he was going to be murdered highlights the differences in culture, between today and culture in Colombia no so long ago.
DeleteIn chapter four of “Chronicles of a Death Foretold” by Gabriel Garcia Marquez, the author uses the gastric imagery to expose the theme of pride. After killing Santiago Nasar, the twins attempted to wash the blood off their clothes, “At the moment they were comforted by the honoring of having their duty, and the only thing that worried them was the persistent of the smell” (91). The twins have committed murder on an attempt to get their family’s honor back because of the shame that Santiago Nasar brought upon them when he slept with Angela Vicario. This in turn shows the reason why the brothers do not have any remorse or feeling of guilt after killing, they even treated him like an animal ready to be slaughter; a pig to be specific because the brothers killed him like one of their pigs, stated in chapter five. This is also one of their pride as butchers, they kill Santiago by using the same knives they used to kill their pig as well as striking him using their knowledge of pig’s anatomy. This stay consistent with the atmosphere of the book which is foreboding. Every details the author mentions give off a shuddering feeling because of how the brothers acted, monster-like.
ReplyDeleteNam Nguyen
I don't want to pull an Eirik but I have to say I completely and UTTERLY disagree with everything you said. You claim that the brothers don't feel remorse or guilt towards what they have done, which is KILLING another person. You claim that the only thing that worries them about the blood is the persistent smell that doesn't go away, well they tried to wash it many times as indicated in pages 78-80 "They asked for lots of water, laundry soap, and rags, and they washed the blood from their arms and faces, and they also washed their shirts" and after all that work the smell was probably gone and the fact that no one else was claiming that the smell wouldn't go away proves that the smell was in their head and there was no smell. Also in chapter 4 the brothers claim that everything smelled of Nasar, this and the fact that the were stuck with the smell of the blood and couldn't get rid of it indicates that there is NO blood and the all they are smelling is their guilty conscious and the fact that they are feeling guilt and remorse towards what they have done which is kill an innocent man. Also in chapter 4 the couldn't sleep in the jail cell, because, again, they felt guilty. Also you claimed that because they are butchers and have killed before they are used to blood and that is why it was so easy for them to kill and not feel bad about it, but the evidence on chapter 4 pages 78-80 clearly indicate that they couldn't rest and sleep because they were feeling guilt towards their actions. So yeah, I didn't want to say anything but I had to say something because you are very wrong, sorry.
DeleteWith love, your favorite class mate Hajir
‘The cocks of dawn would catch us trying to give order to the chain of many chance events that had made absurdity possible,...” (113).
ReplyDeleteThe animal imagery that Marquez used to represent fate here are the cocks. Usually the rooster is an animal many authors use in story to tell that it is the beginning of the day, when they are crowing, and when Marquez uses this, he is starting the horrid day of Santiago’s Death. This keeps the foreboding atmosphere of the story, ominous feeling and chill-down-the-spine. Another reasons why the author uses this symbol as a representation of fate is that it occurs at the beginning of the book and at the end and that it is the ultimate plan, and not can stop it. The people and other things that exist to intervenes, in the plan, are all chess pieces that is commanded by fate, who is the player in this case, to finish what has been started. They fall into places, no matter what the circumstances, proven by the act of the paper note under the door. “He went in without seeing the paper on the floor”( 123-124).
The paper was an obvious warning of Santiago Death, people intervene with fate to prevent Santiago, but then people choose to be neglectful and leave it up to fate. Human intertwine with fate, but it is all planned out, no matter what fate wins.
Nam Nguyen
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"Everything continued smelling of Santiago Nasar that day... They asked for lots of water, laundry soap, and rags, and they washed the blood from their arms and faces, and they also washed their shirts, but they couldn't get any rest." chapter 4, pages 78-80
ReplyDeleteThe blood in this quote is a symbol of guilt and human conscience. They are doing everything they can to get rid of the blood (smell) but it doesn't go away. The blood symbolizes their guilty conscience and the face that no matter how much they try to wash it away and forget it, they will still have to endure the consequences of their actions. "They'd gone three nights without sleep." The smell of the blood not only represents guilt but is also a form of punishment. As shown in the quote above the smell of the blood prevents them from falling asleep. The brothers know that they have done something terrible and regret it, since no one else smells the blood, it shows that the brothers are having mental issues and are struggling to come in terms with their guilty consciences. Also in chapter four there is a quote about how the whole town smelled of Nasar's blood, this symbolizes the whole towns involvement and fault in the murder and how they are all guilty.
-Hajir Hosseini, chapter 4 blog
I agreed with you on the blood symbolizes their remorse for the murder of Santiago, but do you think this is ironic or should I say funny? The author investigated the case after decades, and I am pretty sure that it could be made up so the boys seem innocent. The reasons why I thought this is because the simple matters of pride within the town. Nobody cares to even warn Santiago, because he had done something to hurt another's pride and that is probably why no one care. They did not care because in the town it was also taboo to damage another family or person reputation, and that they would probably wanted Santiago death as well.
DeleteNam Nguyen
P.S- Why would you roast me of all people?
In chapter 4 of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, the action focuses on the aftermath of Santiago’s murder. At the beginning of the chapter there was an autopsy performed on Santiago’s corpse. This autopsy results were unpleasant , “ he only had a few years of life left to him in any case,” (Marquez 76). Even though he had been murdered for his alleged crime, he was not predicted to have a long life. It’s ironic how no matter the choices he made, he was destined to have a similar outcome. It could be fate. Everyone has a set plan, regardless of their actions or the actions that affect their lives. Life manages to work itself out. This is also seen through Angela, “She was reborn. ‘I went crazy over him.’” (92). When first confronted with the idea to marry Bayardo San Ramon, Angela was not intrigued at all. She infact had no interest in him at all. Yet 23 years later, she is intoxicated with the idea of him. This is also ironic, how Angela’s feeling changed over time. Another thing that is ironic in this chapter is the idea of death. This chapter begins with the autopsy of Santiago’s body, and then continues the theme with the idea of Santiago’s scent. Then the chapter jumps ahead in time and discovers Angela’s new passion for Bayardo. It is almost a rebirth in a way. That Angela and Bayardo’s relationship is being reborn threw the ashes of Santiago’s death.
ReplyDelete"They didn't hear the shouts of the whole town, frightened by its own crime." chapter 5
ReplyDeleteThe whole plot of the book Chronicles of a death foretold is about a murder that took place and who is to be blamed for it and why even though a lot of people knew about the dangers surrounding the victim why did no one do anything to prevent it. The main theme of this story is who is to be blamed for the murder of Nasar. That question can be answered by this quote. The whole town is to be blamed for his death. Gabriel Garcia Marquez not only mentions this in chapter 5 in this quote he also uses blood and the symbolism that it represents which is the guilt that people carry because they know they have fault in the death of Nasar. Gabriel Garcia Marquez really tries to convey his message of how humans should not be oblivious to the problems around them and should act upon it even if no one else does. He tries to convey the message that not doing anything about an issue and then blaming others for not doing anything is wrong, he also bashes the idea of society blaming their mistakes and actions on faith and a higher being. Most people didn't do anything because they thought it was meant for him to die and it was his fate so they should not interfere, and that is what he is trying to convey to the readers and warn them about the dangers of ignorance.
-Hajir Hosseini, chapter 5 blog
Hajir I enjoyed the commentary you made. The idea that indifference is a sin in the world of Chronicles of a Death Foretold is ever present. It reminds me of lessons we learn from historical events such as the holocaust or the Armenian Genocide, where indifference aids the oppressors. I guess the overall message trying to be conveyed to people is, that as a people in a functioning society we have a duty. That duty is to help however we can, make society better. The word better is obviously subjective, so ultimately it would be better to say, in order to make the society cooperative, prosperous, and peaceful. These three things seem to be universally desired. As humans we have a duty to ourselves and others to partake in this social contract and I believe this is what Marquez wants the reader to realize. That he or she has a civic duty to uphold. Perhaps even a duty as a human being.
DeleteIn chapter 4,the body of Santiago Nasar is described. It is described in great detail and continuously shown to displayed for the audience. An example of the vivid imagery while describing the body includes, “In the afternoon a syrup colored liquid begin to flow from the wounds, drawing flies, and a purple blotch appeared on the upper lip and spread out very slowly, like a shadow of a cloud on water, up to the hairline”(74). The depiction of body is vivid and used to make the reader uncomfortable. To get to such a state santiago’s body would need to have been left out for a long period of time. This shows how even when the townsfolk couldn’t save Santiago Nasar, they still can’t treat him with decency and let his body rot. The disturbing scene that is Santiago’s body shows how bad the situation Nasar was in. The narrator first introduces the malodor when he says, “In addition, the dogs, aroused by the smell of death, increased the uneasiness”(73). The smell shows just how much of an impact the death of Santiago had on the town. They could not escape the lingering scent of his body like they couldn’t escape his death.
ReplyDeleteChapter 5 reveals how Angela’s life, while almost never talked about, is somewhat tragic in its own way. Angela’s feeling aren’t considered at all by many. After returning home from Bayardo San Ramon’s, after he finds out she’s not a virgin her mother doesn’t ask her for her feelings in the matter but swiftly beats her. When the Vicario brothers set out to kill Santiago they don’t ask or seem to care about her opinion on whether Santiago should live or die. Angela and Santiago’s relationship could be that of lovers yet her family does not care when it comes to their honor. Angela’s opinions or actions do not matter much to the Vicario’s except when they could have negative impacts on the family’s honour most likely because she is a woman. It is revealed that Angela did in fact grow close to Bayardo, and wrote him weekly letters for seventeen years, without a single response. No one seems to care much about her feelings of condition, they view Bayardo as a tragic figure. When Bayardo does come to visit her he comes with clothes to embroider and her unopened letters. Though it’s revealed she loves Bayardo it reveals that he doesn’t care enough about her to read the letters. What’s shocking is that Angela did not cheat on Bayardo yet she’s still seen as a villain to him. Even though she cared enough to write to him he only visited her so she could do her her job as an embroiderer.
ReplyDeleteYour analyzation is well thought out and I appreciate the comments you make. I agree that Angela is not at all listened to by many characters in the book. I think it is part of Marquez’s commentary on how women are treated in society. No one listens to her side of the story and she is blamed immediately for engaging in premarital sex. She has to bear the weight of an action that was not purely her action. No man is expected to come forward and she faces the brutal discipline of her husband and mother. Your analyzation also brings up a more generally seen aspect of the story I’ve noticed. No one seems to care about anyone really at all. When the autopsy of Santiago takes place they describe the procedure as if they take little to no care in performing the task. It isn't surprising though, considering the reason he died in the first place was that the people of the twon did not warn him.
Delete