Gabriel Garcia Marquez uses religious influence, honor and revenge to characterize the setting of “A Chronicle of a Death Foretold”. The novel takes place in the 1950’s in a small coastal town in Colombia. Religion was a central part of this society at this point in time. The narrator emphasizes the importance of attending mass when he/she explains how their mother never left the house. Marquez writes, “she hadn’t gone out into the street in years, not even to attend mass”(20). This gives the reader some idea of the cultural expectation that nearly everyone attended mass. The day prior to Santiago’s death was a wedding. The narrator explains that everyone took part in this huge celebration in one way or another. This idea is continued by the arrival of the bishop. For this celebration, nearly the whole town gathers on the docks. Religious ceremonies, such as weddings and a visit from the bishop, were widely celebrated because of the value of religion in this culture. Religion also influenced societal expectations. Citizens would go to no end in attempt to protect their family name and honor. Later in the novel, it is revealed that Santiago died because he took Angela Vicario’s virginity. For a women in that time to be married for the first time and wear white, then later have it be revealed that she isn’t a virgin, both the marriage and the family of the bride would be seen as dishonorable. In a town of this small size, it would be nearly impossible for any person involved in such an impure act to carry on with their lives. It is to protect this honor that the Vicario brothers saw it fit to murder Santiago Nasar. A revenge of this sort was not seen as completely unreasonable to the general population of this heavily religious, small coastal town. This society saw no limitations in the quest to protect their religious beliefs and honor by any means necessary, especially revenge.
In the beginning chapter of Chronicle of a Death Foretold by Gabriel Garcia Marquez, we can already see elements of magical realism, a style of writing, in his book. These specific elements include references to the supernatural, which helps to connect the real world with extraordinary concepts. In addition, we can see how the book is setup in terms of how it introduces new characters and how it explains the plot. When Clotilde Armenta first saw Santiago Nasar in the square, she commented how “He already looked like a ghost” (15). Not only does this foreshadow Nasar’s impending fate (which we already know to happen from the first sentence of the novel), but it also references a supernatural element: a ghost. The use of this reference helps to connect the real world that the characters live in to abnormal concepts. Also, the use of dreaming in this story helps to give another supernatural, yet real, element to the world. When Nasar told his mother, Placida Linero, about a dream he had last night to which Linero replied “Any dream about birds means good health” (6). As we can see, however, she is mistaken. In addition, the way the novel is structured is very interesting, as this structure of plot is not present in a lot of books. Garcia Marquez starts off the novel by revealing the end of the plot (Nasar’s death), and then proceeds to reveal information of how it all occurred. The purpose of this style is to create more suspense in the plot, despite already knowing the outcome. The slow reveal of information about characters and how they connect to the plot keep the reader interested in the plot. It also makes the novel seem like a “cold case” type of criminal investigation, where the narrator returns years after the event actually occurred.
Through the first chapter in Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez reveals the challenges and difficulties that humans face with memory by the use of doubtful diction. Throughout the book, many characters give their own descriptions of what they remember happened on the day of Santiago Nasar’s death. Through the journalistic style of Marquez’s novel, he uses the narrator to depict their memories. The uncertainty of these memories is seen through the doubtful diction. The narrator states, “No one was certain if…” (Marquez 4), “But most agreed that…” (4), “...she had the impression that…” (14), and “The only thing that I can remember is that…” (23). All of these irresolute statements carry doubt in them and show how the power of memory can sometimes fail. Especially in a fatal and legal incident like this, the failure of memory is rather unfortunate as it makes it difficult to come to a precise and final decision. Unfortunately, this causes many problems in court and legal cases where there are varying accounts of the same scenario. As time goes on, memories often tend to fade away which just builds on the certainty of an account. This poses a huge challenge for court officials to come to a conclusion as they must decipher all the information and come to one conclusive decision. This challenge of memory is explored more throughout the rest of the novel while it narrates different characters’ accounts of the death of Santiago.
I liked your analysis on doubtful diction present throughout Chapter 1 and how it emphasizes the inaccuracy of memory towards the subject of Santiago's death. However I would like to add that this also supports the tone of the novel and the theme of mystery prevalent in the novel. The reader is then hooked into the book and wants to keep reading in order to find out what's to happen next.
Gabriel Garcia Marquez uses a very uniquely journalistic writing style in the first chapter (and in subsequent chapters as well) to add a sort of realistic interest to the text. First of all, this work starts off in the opening sentence with, “On the morning they were going to kill him…” (Marquez 1). In effect, this gives away the “ending” of the story. However, this is not as odd as it seems, as it fits along with the journalistic style that Marquez uses when writing this; the narrator basically tells the events in an article-like fashion, providing insights and quotations from many different characters that either took part in, witnessed, or mostly ignored the events of the day Santiago Nasar gets killed. This opening line acts as a metaphorical headline to this article. As for the realism aspect, Marquez provides many versions of the events in an effort to tell the whole story, as one would do in real life when attempting to decipher a complex situation like what gets portrayed in this novella. Another unique aspect of this work is its nonlinearity. As discussed above, Marquez references the death of Santiago Nasar, something that happened towards the end of the timeline of events, right in the opening lines. This structure can add confusion, but again ties into the journalistic approach Marquez takes. The most interesting bits of a news article always get placed at the top and in the headline. This is used to catch the reader’s eye hopefully forcing them to read more, which probably worked in the case of this book, as it is still widely read.
I definitely agree with your analysis about how Garcia Marquez uses a journalistic style of writing in order to catch and hold the reader’s attention, and how it is very similar to a news story or headline. I also believe that he uses this writing style in order to create suspense in the plot. It is also very interesting how although a news article is supposed to give facts and to inform the reader of everything he or she needs to know, the reader is still left with some unanswered questions by the end of the book. The ending is very abrupt, and this is due not only to the journalistic approach that Garcia Marquez takes, but also the disorientation of time and somewhat random order of events.
My first impression of the book was that i thought it was rather strange how they foreshadow Santiago's death from the first chapter. I also have yet to find a purpose for this book, it seems to be without a plot thus far. So what i, the reader, would assume is that the book is just telling of events leading up to Santiago's death. Santiago was described as being slim and pale, which gives us foreshadowing of his death, as he resembles a cadaver. My first impression of the story gives me the impression that its a sort of ‘Who done-it’ kind of novel, a short murder mistery, and we start with Santiagos death and work our way backwards. I found it strange the fact that so many people knew that Santiago would be killed, yet somehow he didn’t know himself.
Marquez repeatedly uses ghostly diction to reiterate that Nasar’s death was not an accident, nor completely a crime of vengeance, causing the reader to be more intrigued and “sit in the edge of their seats.” Santiago Nasar was the only known Arab in the small Latin-American village he lived in. He was wealthy, intelligent, and peaceful; all the reason for him to be the target. He was an outsider to the town despite being born and raised there. Marquez writes, “He was just like his father… A shit” (Marquez 10). Nasar had people who disliked him, just like everyone else in this world, and just like his father. Although Nasar shared many traits with his father, he was light skinned, and this is referenced multiple times by the narrator and Victoria Guzman. It is also referenced in how most people in the first chapter remember Nasar as always dead. Between Flor’s comment on his hands “frozen and stony, like the hands of a deadman” (13), and Armenta’s remark of “He already looked like a ghost” (15) and the narrator’s mother, seconds before finding out that Nasar was killed, “You always have to take the side of the dead” (23). By constantly stating that Nasar was already close to death before he had actually died, the reader can assume that most of these characters were expecting, if not hoping for his death. It was established that everyone in the town knew that the murder was going to occur, and the “official” reason was given, however no one did anything to prevent it, insinuating that people didn’t care if he lived or died. This can be interpreted in multiple ways. Either Nasar was intimidating to the rest of the village, so they wanted him out of the picture, he had developed enough of a reputation as a playboy that everyone believed the claim, or Nasar was discriminated against and persecuted for simply being different than everyone else which made him an easy target to blame. Perhaps it is a combination of these things.
As I read through the first chapter of the Chronicle of a Death Foretold one of the most significant feature I noticed was the description of the Vicario brothers. First, I found it unusual how an investigator could know such details about the brothers but I was also intrigued by the tone that is conjured during their description. The tone conveyed in their descriptions invoked feelings of sadness mixed with a vibe of hesitance. Using simile Marquez reflects the importance of pride and honor in the culture of Santiago Nasar’s city in this description. The two Vicario brothers were described as “insomniac sleepwalkers” indicating that something was troubling them (15). But when they saw Santiago Nasar “instinct awoke” them (15). This instinct could be referring to their motivation for killing which was to avenge the lost honor of their sister. But before they were reminded of their objective, such an action may have bothered them in some degree. This shows that the culture in the story values honor more than anything because honor would even drive people to murder though it may have been forced. Which explains why Santiago Nasar’s killing is not such a horrendous crime in which they live because its justification is sufficient to the townspeople. Another important symbol i believe for the brothers is the fact that they are twins. In fact they “looked so much alike that it was difficult to tell them apart” (15). The difficulty in identifying which brother is who may connote to the same expectation of men in which they are born into. As if they were just servants whom needed not to be identified correctly and only live to protect the honor of the family. All through chapter one they are always mentioned together and never separately which may hint at lack of control of themselves. Lacking in unique personality, portraying them as more of monsters, but rebuttled with the regretful tone used in their descriptions shows how gender roles has affected the decision of the twins to kill Santiago Nasar
Chronicle of a Death Foretold gives a look into an almost unbelievable situation, of humans being so apathetic as to completely disregard the intentions of murder. The author presents this through magical realism. Magical realism uses language to portray an event that may seem ridiculous as something real. For example, an entire town having knowledge of a murder about to take place and no one doing anything about it. The story is told in a journalistic manner, piecing together events taken from different stories being told. The mood changes with each new interviewee– when speaking with Santiago Nasar’s mother, she makes Santiago out to be a perfect man, awaiting the bishop after getting married only a few days before. In the section with Santiago’s mother, he is referred as such: “By his nature, Santiago Nasar was merry and peaceful, and openhearted” (8). Along with this, he’s made out to be sensitive as his mother says, “He was dressed in white linen that had been washed in plain water because his skin was so delicate that it couldn’t stand the noise of starch” (7). Here, Santiago is seen to be sweet and sensitive, as a mother would see their son. However, the reader gets a different perspective when they follow the description of Victoria Guzmán. She says, “Another man like that hasn’t even been born again. He was just like his father, a shit” (10). Here we see how he’s perceived as a bad guy- completely different than his mother’s perspective. Victoria also says: “He always got up with the face of a bad night” (9). This reveals more of his character, seemingly less delicate and sensitive than his mother says and a worse man. He’s mentioned to have seduced Victoria and the other servant, showing just how bad he can be. As the book continues, more perspectives will be revealed, and a clearer picture will come into place to describe Santiago’s character and the day of the murder.
In the second chapter of Chronicle of a Death Foretold by Gabriel Garcia Marquez, more is revealed about Angela Vicario, the woman who a new, mysterious man named Bayardo San Roman, is planning to marry. Garcia Marquez characterizes Angela Vicario as how a typical woman would have been during that time: submissive. He uses depressing language to convey how other people view Angela Vicario, as well as how she views herself in the world in which she lives. The narrator’s mother, Placida Linero, gives insight into what a “perfect” woman, or at least was considered to be “perfect” at the time, would be like. She talked about how the Vicario sisters know how to “do screen embroidery, sew by machine, weave bone lace, wash and iron, make artificial flowers and fancy candy, and write engagement announcements” (ii.31). At the time, it would have been a man’s dream to marry one of the Vicario sisters. Shortly after, Linero says “Any man will be happy with them because they’ve been raised to suffer” (ii.31). The use of depressing language by Linero shows how at this time period, women were not in the most enjoyable position, at least by modern standards. Later in the chapter, Angela Vicario herself says how “The only thing I prayed to God for was to give me the courage to kill myself” (ii.37). Although most people thought that she was living a great life, especially since she was about to marry a very rich and “charming” man, she was depressed about her situation. The fact that Angela Vicario is asking for the courage to kill herself shows how society at the time can push people to hope for such terrible things.
In the second chapter of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez reveals the cultural norms during the time of Santiago Nasar’s death. It is very clear that religion plays a large part in shaping the community’s way of life and influencing their values and morals (this can be shown through the importance of the Bishop’s arrival to town in the first chapter). One of the most prominent cultural norms that is presented in Marquez’s novel is the idea of arranged marriages. This also uncovers the fact that women were expected to be submissive and fall under the control of their husband. When Bayardo San Roman first arrives in town, he has the intention of finding a wife and he immediately chooses Angela Vicario just based off of appearance. He woos her with his extravagance and money. Marquez writes, “Besides, Bayardo San Roman hadn’t even tried to court her, but he had bewitched the family with his charm” (Marquez 34). Because of this, he knows he will get any woman he wants and he knows that the woman will have no choice but to obey. Another expectation that was normal during this time period that was present in marriages was the assumption that the new wife was to be a virgin and that her husband was to be the one to take her virginity. This corresponds to the Christian value that the first time one has sex it will be with their spouse. However, the expectations that surround sex serve as a double standard during this era. While the women were supposed to be virgins until the night of their marriage, it was acceptable for men to go to whorehouses or brothels (in this case it is called Maria Alejandrina Cervante’s house of mercies) and have casual sex whenever they pleased. Through these cultural norms, Marquez is able to reveal the inequality between men and women and show how they were seen as “normal” during their time period.
Through Gabriel Garcia Marquez’s third chapter in his novel Chronicle of a Death Foretold, the author reveals the importance of honor and reputation during the time period of the novel. The Vicario twins justify their murder on the terms that they did it to preserve their sister’s honor. The opening sentence of the chapter states, “The lawyer stood by the thesis of homicide in legitimate defense of honor, which was upheld by the court in good faith…” (Marquez 48). The view of one’s honor was so important to the community that even the judge excused the twins for their crime. In accordance to today’s values, this murder would be unforgivable as the law usually does not take into account motives. The societal norm that one’s honor must be protected was so strong that the fact that someone was killed in order to preserve one was overlooked, even by the priest Father Amador. Immediately after Pedro and Pablo Vicario killed Santiago, they ran to the church to confess. One of the ten commandments states that one shall not murder. However, Father Amador excuses their immoral behavior as he believes it was the right thing to do for the Vicario family and their sister. The twins say, “‘We killed him openly, but we are innocent’”... “‘Before God and before men, it was a matter of honor” (35). Father Amador agrees with the twins because of the belief that reputation and honor override everything else in their society. Unfortunately, this way of thinking has brainwashed the community into excusing such horrific crimes.
In the third chapter of Chronicle of a Death Foretold by Gabriel Garcia Marquez, we can observe more of the recurring motif of neglect and ignorance, especially towards Santiago Nasar’s impending assassination. When questioned by the narrator about why they didn’t warn Santiago Nasar of the Vicario brothers’ plans of murdering him, many said that they didn’t think that the Vicario brothers were serious. When Clotilde Armenta wakes her husband, Don Rogelio de la Flor, and tells him of what the Vicario brothers are going to do, de la Flor replies, “Don’t be silly…Those two aren’t about to kill anybody, much less someone rich” (iii.55). This neglecting behavior not only shows how Don Rogelio de la Flor did not think much of the Vicario brothers’ threats, but also how he does not believe in his wife that she is telling the truth. Later, Colonel Lazaro Aponte says how when he found them in Coltilde Armenta’s store, he “thought they were nothing but a pair of big bluffers” (iii.56). Despite the Vicario brothers openly stating that they were going to “cut Santiago Nasar’s guts out” (iii.59), many people like Apote and Faustino Santos, the butcher, believed that “they were kidding around” (iii.59). When the narrator asked his brother about the events, his brother said that he did not remember them. However, he also said, “Who the f***k would ever think that the twins would kill anyone, much less with a pig knife!” (iii.69). This demonstrates how even when someone does not recall the events that occurred, he or she can still show neglect and disregard for the severity of a situation.
You had an insightful analysis about the motif of neglect in chapter 3 using multiple character examples to show this pattern. What i found the most interesting of all the quotes is the narrator's brother's dialogue. His use of vulgar diction and direct approach creates an enraged tone, as if he was angry about the twins being accused of going to kill Santiago Nasar. But I believe that his anger could also indicate how the town feels partly to blame for Nasar's murder, so the brother feels attacked by the narrator. Also I noticed you commented twice already. I think we only have to comment once a day since we should only have seven total entries, including the commenting homework for next class.
At the beginning of chapter two, Gabriel Garcia-Marquez portrays Bayardo San-Roman as an almost God-like figure. Here, the narrator’s mother states such things as, “he challenged the most skillful swimmers, who were many, and left them behind by twenty strokes in crossing the river and back” and “it also seems that he’s swimming in gold” (Marquez 29). It seems everyone gets quite impressed by this new man in the village. However, the reasons for why they become impressed seem sort of cloudy. The narrator’s mother uses these praises of him, as well as a few others, which give paint San-Roman as quite a remarkable (somewhat impossibly so) character. That he can actually do all of these things seems sort of unlikely, but one undeniable quality of San-Roman is he very wealthy. After all, he is the son of a war hero. Anyway, this presents a possible explanation for his exorbitantly high esteem in town. In a small village, probably lacking an abundance of wealth, a rich man like San-Roman would certainly draw some attention. This is most likely the reason that Angela Vicario was forced, by her own mother, to marry him. His wealth was certainly a strong determining factor (that and Angela’s mother does not get portrayed as a great human being; she beats her daughter when it is discovered she is not a virgin). It seems that one of the only characters with a negative first impression of San-Roman is the narrator. This is not all that surprising though, as the narrator has his own God-like insight into the minds of all characters (some magic realism at work?).
Throughout this chapter, we are beginning to see the various social conventions present in the culture of this village. Women are brought up to be wives, to act proper and be helpful to their husbands. Men, on the other hand, are meant to be providers and may do whatever they please. The Vicarios’ mother says, “The brothers were brought up to be men. The girls had been reared to get married” (García Marquez, 30). Bayardo San Román is a wealthy, attractive man, coming from a prestigious family. This presents the perfect opportunity for the Vicarios to marry of their daughter, Angela. In this culture, marriage is not meant to be a reunion of love, but rather a strategy to unite families and give the best reputation possible. The mother again says: “Love can be learned too” (35). Speaking of reputations, Angela Vicario ruins the reputation of her family with an action against the standards acceptable for women. Women are meant to be virgins until marriage, and be loyal to only their husband. Men, on the other hand, are free to have premarital sex and even have other relations while they are married. The narrator, Santiago, and Cristo are all drinking and playing in a whorehouse while the women must sit alone at home. These are double standards, completely against the women. Once Bayardo discovers his wife is not a virgin, suddenly she is “tainted” and returned to her family for her mother to beat her daughter until she loses hope. Losing virginity before marriage is seen as a crime– however, while it is the woman’s fault for sleeping with a man before she’s to be married, the man is blamed for the action. Angela’s twin brothers view the crime as someone taking their sister and their family’s honor, and the only way to resolve it is to murder the man responsible. This shows just how important reputation is in their society, that they would take someone’s life simply to restore theirs.
The interesting thing about the murder of Santiago Nasar is that it was committed by two men believed to be good people, and that no one believed they would carry out the action. However, because the motive to kill Santiago was because he had taken their sister’s honor and virginity, some believed that the murder was justified and even necessary. Pablo Vicario’s fiancée even tells him that she won’t marry him if he doesn’t murder Santiago and retrieve his sister’s honor. The twins are also released three years following the murder, so they did not receive harsh punishments for the crime either. Does this mean the murder was justified? A man taking away a woman’s purity seems to defile reputation of family and ruin the woman’s life (before marriage). The twins appear to relate Santiago Nasar to a pig, as their first thought is to go to the butcher shop and take out and sharpen butcher knives. It is not good enough to find a gun and end his life quickly; rather, they prefer to draw out his death and treat him as a hunk of meat, meant to be torn apart. In other cases, perverted men have been called “pigs” in real life. Here, Santiago Nasar is related to a pig because he took Angela’s virginity, and he is treated as such when they take his life. Even while the brothers are running around town, finding and sharpening their knives, everyone around town has no suspicion that the murder will actually take place. Just because people usually present a respectable façade, does it mean that they will uphold that? If the townspeople are so easily deceived by a familiar face, how often does this happen in real life? The Vicario brothers got away with it, and even had their crime justified because of the situation.
Chapter Two focuses on the groom, Bayardo San Román and the bride’s family, the Vicarios. The narrator keeps contradicting himself on his characterization of San Román. At times he praises him on his wealth and kindness, but maintains that he “was not a man to be known at first sight” (Márquez 26). The intended effect of this is to cause the reader to question the narrator’s perspective. Quite often in chapter 1 the narrator would bring something up that seemed to be significant, then never explain its significance, even indirectly. By questioning the narrator on this occasion, we are lead to question him in others. What’s important? What isn’t? An example of this questioning is found in Nasar’s obsession with predicting how much San Román is spending on the wedding. The reader is forced to assume that money is significant to society because of how much San Román is spending, but why is Nasar, the man we later know to be accused of taking Angela’s virginity, the one who obsesses over it? What is it about him? Perhaps it is a representation of machismo; whoever can spend more money is more macho and suited for Angela. But that would imply that Nasar wishes to marry Angela, and there has been no evidence for that. Overall, the narrator’s style and perspective confuses readers, causing them to question the events and opinions in the story.
Chapter three further delves into the society that constitutes the setting in this story. Gabriel Garcia-Marquez writes: “We killed him openly,” Pedro Vicario said, “but we are innocent.” “Perhaps before God,” said Father Amador. “Before God and before man,” Pablo Vicario said. “It was a matter of honor.” This quotation is quite profound in the scope of the novel in that it largely portrays the society’s feelings on the matter of the murder. At the time this book in which this book was set, the sense of “honor” (which gets used here and many other places and becomes a major theme) is extremely important. In a sense, it was not only expected but also necessary for the Vicario brothers to carry out this murder thus avenging her alleged loss of virginity. Had they not killed Santiago, they would have been seen as weak and cowardly, an ultimate hit to their reputations. This last point is further supported later on in the story when it gets revealed that Prudencia Cotes waits three years, the length of the brothers’ imprisonment, to marry Pablo Vicario. She even explains that she would not have married him had he not carried out the horrific act. This was just what was expected at the time from everyone. Lastly, the idea of protecting the family honor is supported throughout the village. This is why the many townspeople neglect to intervene, warn Santiago Nasar, or do anything helpful whatsoever to prevent the killing of a possibly innocent man.
Gabriel Garcia Marquez uses deceptive diction to characterize Bayardo San Roman in his novel, A Chronicle of a Death Foretold. Just after Bayardo San Roman arrives in town, Marquez writes, “He seemed more serious to me that his antics would have led one to believe, and with a hidden tension that was barely concealed by his excessive good manners”(pg 28). Angela Vicario describes him this way and makes it clear that she doesn't see him as genuine. Marquez uses phrases like “led one to believe” because it implies that Bayardo leads everyone to believe he is a perfect, god like character when the reality is quite different. The way in which he does this is by lying to everyone. Rather, he omits his flaws. This characteristic is shown through the use of the word “concealed”. This is the second time that Marquez describes Bayardo using this word. It is fitting because of Bayardo’s ability to hide his flaws from everyone. Everyone, meaning all except for the woman he wishes to marry. Angela never makes clear the exact characteristic of Bayardo that make him so undesirable except that he uses his wealth, rather that the content of his character, to court her. Marquez makes this feature notable by using the word “excessive” to describe Bayardo’s manners. Although it may not seem bad, necessarily, to have an excess of manners, the word excessive has a negative connotation. A man of such high socioeconomic status is expected to have an excess of many things. However, being in excess of a characteristic such as manners may lead others to believe that he is hiding something. This is in fact the case because at this point, almost nothing is known about where he came from or why. Such deception characterizes Bayardo San Roman through the use of deceptive diction.
Gabriel Garcia Marquez uses barbaric diction to foreshadow the life the twins will lead following the murder. Just after the twins killed Santiago Nasar, Gabriel Garcia Marquez describes them, “...exhausted from the barbarous work of death, and they're closed in arms were soaked and their faces smeared with sweat and still living blood, but the preist recalled the surrender as a great act of dignity”(pg 49). The twins are described as exhausted and covered in blood, just as a hunter would be following the death of his prey. Thousands of years prior to setting of this novel, people on earth lived very simple lives. They would find shelter, food and reproduce. More barbaric ways of life were guided less by morals and more by honor. In this way, the characters in this novel have a lot in common with ancient people. The practice of killing your friend as a result of betrayal is not a very progressive way of thinking. However, in this period and in ancient societies it was not frowned upon at all as long as it was done to protect the family’s honor. They protect the family name in the same way that ancient men would protect the people in their tribe. They would kill any threat to their tribe in brutal ways. Santiago Nasar was not shot with a gun. Instead, he was repeatedly stabbed with knives and left incredibly mangled. Following this incident, the twins would go to prison. Life in prison is very simplistic. Prisoners eat and sleep with very little activity in between. This is again related to ancient lives. Marquez uses barbaric diction to describe the twins to foreshadow the simplicity of their lives following the killing of Santiago Nasar.
I totally agree with your analysis of how some of the characters’ behavior in this novel, such as the Vicario brothers’, can be connected the behaviors of people in ancient times. I never thought to think that far back and to connect it to this novel. However, I also believe that the bystanders in Chronicle of a Death Foretold don’t really match ancient behaviors. If honor was so important to both the characters in the novel as well as in ancient times, wouldn’t they try to stick up for someone who was being attacked, especially if that person was significant to someone else, such as the other Arab members of the community?
Chapter 3 concerns itself with the events before the murder, chronologically before chapter 1. The chapter deals with the excuses of the public through concepts like honor and disbelief. The Vicario brothers took it upon themselves to defend the honor of their sister and their family, and the way they see best to do this is by killing the one who caused them the dishonor, Nasar. Although, even after they kill Nasar, we later learn the flee the town because of the uproar the entire family has caused. This brings into question if honor is only a social construct, or if it is actually something felt by people universally. The brothers did what they believed would set things right, but it proved in the end to accomplish nothing. The narrator never fails to say that the brothers are good people, “the prisoners remembered them for their good character and sociability” (Márquez 48). But he also does mention that they never showed regret, and the murder seemed to be more passionate than they really let on, forcing the reader to decide whether the crime was justified or not. The rest of the village knew about the impending murder, yet no one did anything to ward Nasar; everyone that wanted to had some sort of excuse as to why they didn’t. The police officer claimed that he had broken up enough fights the previous night so he wouldn’t concern himself in the matter. Faustino Santos assumed that it was a joke because the brothers had their knives sharpened twice, after the first set was taken away from them. Numerous people heard them shouting it in the market, and still no one did anything. They all claimed that it either wasn’t their concern, it wasn’t anything to be concerned about, or that someone else would make it their concern.
What is interesting in the second chapter is the similarity in the role of women and men between the Chronicle of a Death Foretold, the Taming of the Shrew and A Doll’s House. In the journalistic style book of the Chronicle Death Foretold, the women are expected to act as a median for the family to attain riches. The relationship between Angela Vicario and Bayardo San Roman is built upon this expectation. The narrator states that “Angela Vicario who didn’t want to marry him” (34) ended up still marrying San Roman because his family was rich. Then Angela’s family who was poor will have a share in the wealth of San Roman. She was beautiful, but she was not a virgin. This is what starts the main conflict of the book; Angela failing to be the ideal wife like her sisters who were “reared up to get married”(31). In the Taming of the Shrew, were expected to be submissive and to work for the man. In a Doll’s House, women are like the decorations for the husband, just how San Roman chose Angela for her beauty and essentially her virginity to increase his own pride. Women can also work in Chronicle of a Death Foretold, but seem to be limited to decorative work like embroidery. With similarities in the discrimination of women, this could also indicate a similarity in the purpose of the story. Marquez could also be making a statement about the objectification of women and how discriminatory it is. I also stated that there is also a motif of men in all these stories. All of the men married so far have a sense of pride in their wealth as well as viewing wealth as an attractive trait for men. So, the purpose of the story may not be a feminist message but more humanist; including the role of the expectations of men in marriage for convenience. If men and women were not expected to be treated like objects in marriage, then marriage may be bounded by love instead of money or beauty.
In chapter 3, the reader discovers the weight of the crime that the Vicario brothers had committed. In our society any murder despite any reason is a heinous crime requiring a serious punishment. But in the magical realism of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Marquez asks the question if there is any justification for murder, and if so to what degree. The society of Santiago Nasar values honor more than anything. This is evident by Bayardo San Roman’s anger for Santiago Nasar supposedly taking Angela’s virginity. The Vicario brothers used the reason of honor to defend themselves of their innocence “‘ Before God and before men,’ Pablo Vicario said. “It was a matter of honor’”(49). They would have even “done it a thousand times over for the same reason” (48). Showing absolutely no regret in their action, the Vicario brothers shows the reader that there is a justification for murder. Their personality is also taken into account by the older prisoners in that they had “good character and sociability”, which would be unusual for a bloodthirsty monster. This creates an effect of shock on the reader which allow them to receive the question about justification for murder. But there is a certain degree in which the justification can account for. This is the way of style of murder of the victim, which we also account for in our own society. The reason why the brothers were sentenced for a long time is because that the murder was so brutal that “it was necessary to use public funds to repair the main door of Placida Linero’s house” (49). While there may be an arguably a reason for a murder, there is no reason for such brutality.
In the fourth chapter of A Chronicle of a Death Foretold, we get a better picture of the aftermath of Santiago Nasar’s death. Many characters such as the Vicario brothers, Bayardo San Roman, and Angela Vicario have separated and followed their own paths. The narrative now enters this quasi calm period, as the narrator now reveals what happened to many of the other characters after this tragedy. Early in the chapter, the author Gabriel Garcia Marquez describes the Vicario brothers as living in a very poor state in jail. The most “unbearable for [the Vicario brothers] in jail was their lucidity” (iv.79). However, not only was their terrible mental state a significant factor in their lives, but also the conditions of the jail. For Pedro Vicario, “The pain in his groin had reached his throat, his urine was shut off, and he suffered the frightful certainty that he wouldn’t sleep ever again for the rest of his life” (iv.80). Pablo Vicario suffered from chronic diarrhea after every meal. Later however, Pedro Vicario decides to enlist in the army again, but he is never heard of after that. Pablo Vicario became a goldsmith and married Prudencia Cotes. The Vicario brothers seem to be in poorer condition, or at least in a more distressed state, than the person who they killed previously. In addition, we are also able to see the love that is still evident between Angela Vicario and Bayardo San Roman. Angela, living in Guajira, began to send letters to Bayardo San Roman, who was taken back by his family. Towards the end of the chapter, the narrator goes on to say how Bayardo comes back to visit Angela with all of the letters “arranged by date in bundles tied with colored ribbons, and they were all unopened” (iv.95). I took this to mean that Angela’s love for Bayardo is so strong, that the letters did not need to be opened and read in order to display her affection for him. The fact that she wrote him almost two thousand letters is enough to show Bayardo how she feels.
I like you analysis on the continued existence of love between Bayardo San Roman and Angela Vicario. I never thought about how the fact that Bayardo never opened one of the thousands of letters he received from Angela because it was enough evidence to show the extent of her love. However, I am still confused on why Angela suddenly became so in love with Bayardo after he left her when she previously did not want to marry him at all. Do you have any ideas on this?
In the fifth and final chapter of Chronicle of a Death Foretold by Gabriel Garcia Marquez, the exact events of Santiago Nasar’s death are revealed. In addition, the nature of Nasar’s death is very strange and supernatural, and this further connects to the theme of the supernatural and extraordinary that is prevalent throughout the novel. Towards the end of the novel, Santiago Nasar is finally killed by the Vicario brothers. He is brutally stabbed and mortally wounded, but the commentary provided by the Vicario brothers years later, as well as various supernatural events contradict his physical condition. When telling the narrator of their encounter with Santiago Nasar, one of the twins, Pedro Vicario, said “The strange thing is that the knife kept coming out clean...there wasn’t a drop of blood” (v.118). Normally people bleed when stabbed, so this unusual occurrence just adds to the supernatural ambiance of this novel. However, it doesn’t stop there. After Santiago has had his guts spilled by a horizontal slash through the stomach, “he walked more than a hundred yards, completely around the house, and went in through the kitchen door” (v.119). Everyone is shocked as a man who is carrying his guts in his hands is walking through a house. The use of this supernaturality helps to show how this world that the novel is based around is closer to the extraordinary world than we think. It also gives an eerie tone to the book and leaves the reader slightly confused and perplexed.
Nice analysis! I definitely saw some supernatural elements regarding the killing of Santiago Nasar. This theme of supernaturality ties in with overarching motif of magical realism. In this case, Marquez depicts realistic events with unrealistic diction and thoughts from the characters. Another instance of this, with regards to his death, in the story is when all of the townspeople talk about "smelling him." The smell of a dead man certainly could not linger that long, but in this case, it does. Most of this magical realism serves a symbolic purpose. In the case of the smell, it symbolizes the metaphorical "blood on the towns hands." In the case of the knife coming clean, I am not exactly sure what it means. As you said, it is, by nature, "confusing and perplexing."
At the beginning of the fourth chapter in Chronicle of a Death Foretold, the narrator gives an in-depth and rich description of Santiago Nasar’s autopsy. While reading this chapter, I began to wonder about the ethics of an autopsy. If you already know how someone died, what is the point of destroying the body again? Is it right for the law to require an autopsy for a violent death when the body has already been massacred? I also began to think that although someone has died, you should still respect the body and give reverence. Although the characters in the book tried their best to maintain Nasar’s body in good condition by trying to preserve it for as long as possible with the available resources they had, I think that the autopsy was not necessary. The first line of the chapter states, “The damage from the knives was only a beginning for the unforgiving autopsy…” (Marquez 72). The priest who performed the autopsy states, “‘It was as if we killed him all over again after he was dead’” (72). He and the narrator seem to agree with my views as they say that the autopsy was “stupid,” “a massacre,” and “not entirely proper.” The narrator never mentions if the Nasar family had given consent for the autopsy to take place, but Marquez does write that it was “an order from the mayor.” Although it may have been a custom in their town to perform the procedure, I think that it should have ultimately been the family’s decision. The way that Nasar’s autopsy is described is very graphic. The narrator uses visual imagery to describe the aftermath. He states, “They gave us back a completely different body… The empty shell, stuffed with rags and quicklime and sewed up crudely with coarse twine and baling needles, was on the point of falling apart…” (77). Also the fact that the autopsy was not performed by a licensed professional and with craftsmen’s tool support the fact that “there hadn’t been any concern at all for the state of the body” (74). Marquez’s description of Nasar’s autopsy challenges the reader to think about the ethics of this procedure that is still practiced today.
In the final chapter of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez finally describes Santiago Nasar’s death scene that was was originally mentioned in the first sentence of the book. Marquez’s novel, which surrounds the murder of a man who may or may not be innocent, turns out to be more of a novel about the events that took place at the time of the murder, rather than if Nasar was actually the man who took Angela Vicario’s virginity. In a way, I find this anticlimactic because it would be satisfying to know if Nasar was truly guilty and if he deserved such a fatal punishment. The title includes “Death Foretold” which shows how the people of the town knew about the possibility of the Vicario twins killing Nasar, but they had all thought that Nasar had already been warned about his killing. However, they were wrong and according to the narrator’s thoughts, he thought that Nasar had died without understanding his own death. The last sentence of the novel that wraps up Nasar’s death scene brings back the purpose of Marquez’s title. It states, “Then he went into his house through the back door that had been open since six and fell in his face in the kitchen” (Marquez 120). Nasar had been attacked in front of a door that had been locked and he was not able to save himself by running into his home. If he had had the time to run around his house to the back door, Nasar would still be alive. This final sentence shows that although his death may have been foretold, it could have been avoidable (both by the protection and knowledge from the townspeople and by the open back door).
I really like your analysis of how the plot comes full circle. The story starts with Nasar in his home and ends in the same place. He also concludes the book with a slight variation of the title. I think that this may represent the way Marquez views life in a circular manor and also gives the reader some purpose to the non-chronological order. It could also be a reference to karma. How everything that is done eventually comes back to the person. However, it is not known if Santiago Nasar was actually the one to commit the crime for which he was punished but I think that your analysis reveals a huge part of the plot that furthers the themes in this novel.
Chapter 4 has two distinct purposes; the illustration of the aftermath of the murder and Angela’s newfound love for Bayardo San Román. Because the conflict between Angela and Bayardo is tangential to the main plot, that suggests that it holds some deep purpose for being included. However, I found the events after Nasar’s death to be much more interesting. Nasar’s autopsy was handled ridiculously, being done by Father Carmen Amador, someone who was in medical school but entered the seminary instead, because the local doctor was out of town. This shows law enforcement's lack of commitment to the case. They didn’t care what happened, or why it happened, they just wanted to deal with the issue quickly. The lack of respect to Nasar and his family is especially evident in how Father Carmen used common tools to autopsy the body, as well as how he threw away the internal organs with “an angry blessing” (76). The entire town came running to see what had happened, flying in like a flock of vultures. The smell of death in the air never left the town, from the moment of Nasar’s death. First, like the townsfolk, dogs were attracted, “they escaped from where they were and burst madly into the house” (Márquez 74). Rabid animals hounding the body were juxtaposed to the people of the town, suggesting that the dogs symbolize the animalistic curiosity of humanity. It also suggests that the humans who sat and watched are just as savage and cruel as the dogs actively trying to eat the dead body of Nasar. The smell of Nasar wafted through the entire village for quite some time. The narrator notes how his fiance attempted to sleep with him, possibly in an effort to take her mind off of the tragedy, then stopped because he smelled of Nasar. The Vicario twins probably had it the worst. They showered and washed themselves countless times, but they claimed they could still smell Nasar on them. Along with all the other maladies the Vicario twins encountered over the next couple of days, it seemed that they, along with the rest of the town, was cursed by Nasar. The smell over the town represents the entire guilt of the townsfolk, the smell growing stronger around those more directly involved in the murder of Nasar.
I agree that the autopsy done to Santiago Nasar is poorly executed, but it also gave me an interesting thought with the quote you provided. Why would he give "an angry blessing". Why would Marquez include such an oxymoron to characterize the priest. His anger could reflect the emotions of a supernatural power that seems to be present in the book. While the murder of Santiago Nasar was just to men, it may have not been just to God. I also liked how you compared the animals with humans because it gave me a better understanding of the stance of Marquez in if the townspeople should be held accountable for their actions or not
In chapter 4 of his novel, A Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez uses Angela Vicario’s letters to symbolize yearning to convey human’s natural tendency to want what they can't have. When Bayardo San Roman first made his intentions with Angela clear, she had no interest in marrying him. She felt that he used his wealth and good looks to get the things he wanted rather than good character. She used the word “bewitched” to describe the effect he had on her family. She fought against marrying him, but eventually her family and cultural expectations won out. They got married but he ended up taking her back home just 5 hours after their marriage because he discovered that she wasn't a virgin. Following this discovery, Angela’s mother began beating her. As Angela recalls this beating decades later Marquez writes, “The blows hurt less because she knew they were for him”(pg 91). Angela showed no interest in Bayardo until she realized that she couldn't have him. She married him without love but fell for him the second he left. It's possible that after he left she simply fell in love with the idea of him. It's much easier to paint a pretty picture of someone when they're not around to prove that image wrong. So Angela started to write him letters. These letters expressed her longing to be with him. She never found anyone else to fill the void that he'd left and even became a virgin again for him. This yearning may have been brought on by feelings of guilt over not being the virgin and the wife that she wished she could be. Her dissatisfaction with herself led her to seek approval elsewhere. Bayardo did eventually return to her with thousands of unopened letters. Angela’s dream was never achieved because the cause of her yearning wasn't Bayardo, it was a lack of self esteem. The letters convey the theme that humans only want what they can't have, and even if they get what they want, it's never what they hoped for.
Gabriel Garcia Marquez uses the magistrate’s ink to juxtapose life and death in chapter 5 of A Chronicle of a Death Foretold. Marquez writes, “The marginal notes, and not just because of the color of the ink, seemed to be written in blood”(pg 99). The blood represents death. Specifically, the death of Santiago Nasar whose death was the purpose of this report. The magistrate juxtaposes the ink and it's connection to blood with the things written in the ink. The narrator only shares two of the marginal notes but both seem to be life lessons. The first reads, “Give me a prejudice and I will move the world”(pg 100). The use of the word move signals the reader to interpret this note as a sort of progress, rather than a regret. This book is filled with guilt felt by other characters which is fitting since it centers around death. However, motion seems to invoke the opposite feeling of hope and life. The second margin note reads, “fatality makes us invisible”(pg 113). This quote means that no matter what is done in a person's life, it will eventually be forgotten because they will die and their legacy will be lost. This could also be interpreted as a positive thing. That maybe all sins and wrongdoings will be forgotten and so no one should be afraid to live because even the worst of mistakes can be healed by time. This is supported in the story by the Vicario brothers. They killed someone but they are still remembered by many as heroes for restoring honor to their family. These marginal notes serve as warnings for how to live, rather than how one may die. Life and death are juxtaposed through the symbolism of ink in A Chronicle of a Death Foretold.
In chapter four, the autopsy of Santiago Nasar’s corpse tests the boundaries of what we believe to be ‘right’ and ethical. Along with the autopsy itself, the actual murder surpassed boundaries as well. First of all, a professional doctor did not perform the autopsy; rather, the priest was in charge of the ordeal. A priest’s job is to honor the dead and help people spiritually (in religion), and his participation in the autopsy completely contradicts that. The priest says himself, “’It was as if we killed him all over again after he was dead’” (Marquez, 72). Marquez uses visual imagery to display such a gruesome situation: “in the afternoon a syrup-colored liquid began to flow from the 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” (74). It was performed in a public school, meant for learning. Many people in the town were watching, crowded around the table to watch a man’s body be torn apart. Dogs were snarling in the distance, smelling the dead body. The entire situation was awful. Because his body was so destroyed from the autopsy, Santiago Nasar could not even have a proper burial, and they hurriedly put him in the ground. Beside the autopsy, the Santiago’s corpse was already in bad shape. Though we don’t know how many stab wounds there were, the twins punctured him enough for the report to conclude: “it looked like a stigma of the crucified christ” (75). He had wounds on his hands, torso, and thighs. The twins’ motive was to restore their sisters honor by killing Santiago Nasar– so why did they dismantle his body? Why stab him several times? Though murder is already unethical, this questions just how far you need to go to take a life. It was said that “seven of the many wounds were fatal” (75), meaning that the Vicario brothers stabbed Santiago many times after he was already dead. Perhaps this is why they feel guilty later on, as seen from their inability to get Santiago’s “smell” off of them.
I completely agree with your analysis on the morals and ethics challenged throughout Chronicle of a Death Foretold. I wrote a post similar to yours about the ethics surrounding autopsies. You mentioned how the autopsy was done by a priest who was not qualified. The mention of many religious aspects is repeated throughout the novel which adds to the challenging of ethics, as ethics and morals are the driving force behind many faiths. One thing I noticed interesting was that the twins immediately confessed to the church their murder as they believed they were innocent. However, one of the Ten Commandments is that one shall not murder. The fact that murder is clearly unacceptable and that the twins still believed they were innocent seems very twisted.
Frustrating is the most accurate word possible to describe chapter 5 of Chronicle. Márquez, through the narrator, drags the reader through numerous retellings of the same forty eight hour period of time for seemingly no reason. There is no grand conclusion, no resolution to the conflict, just the series of excuses and coincidences that lead up to Nasar’s death. Traditional chronicles follow a series of events in chronological order, and usually contain some sort of resolution. This isn’t the case in Chronicle of a Death Foretold. It is this unusual structure that is one of the root causes of frustration for the reader. There must be a purpose to this, and some of the things revealed in chapter 5 may aid in discovering this. Perhaps the entire reason there is no conclusion is because the novel isn’t about a man being killed for a crime he may or may not have committed, but rather it is about how an entire town could collectively fail to alert one of its members of his impending death. This theory is most supported by Yamil Shaium. Yamil was the only person who actively attempted to alert Nasar of the threat to his life, “the only one who did what he had proposed… he preferred to consult first with Cristo Bedoya in case the latter was better informed” (Márquez 103). Yamil was a friend of the Nasar’s, both father and son, so he would ultimately be looking out for Santiago Nasar, but he somehow let Nasar continue walking away while he consulted with Cristo. I may just be ranting, but isn’t it much more logical to pull aside both Cristo and Santiago, this way Nasar is in less danger and can be alerted immediately in case he wasn’t already informed? This is just one of the lapses in judgement that lead to Nasar’s death, along with the countless other coincidences and excuses. Nasar being accused probably wasn’t preventable. However, his death is arguably so. This is probably why the reader becomes so angered and confused while reading the events unfold. Márquez could be saying multiple things through this though. On one end, he could be arguing that as much as we think life is predictable and situations can be under control, nothing is really controllable. On the other end, he could be saying that humans are ultimately pack animals. When they err, they err together.
I was with the majority of readers, frustrated by the conclusion of the novel as you say. Though it is indeed frustrating that the narrator never does discover who did take Angela Vicario's virginity or why the townspeople chose to let Santiago Nasar die, there is a grander purpose in the "chronicle" (that's not truly a chronicle). Due to the countless coincidences that lead to Santiago Nasar's murder and death, the author, Gabriel Garcia Marquez, aims to give the message that some things are simply unavoidable–fate. No matter the efforts of Yamil or Cristo, there was no other possible outcome to Santiago Nasar's day at that particular time. Some things are just fated to be, and Marquez chooses not to blame the townspeople in the novel because there truly was nothing they could do.
In chapter 5, we are lead to believe that Santiago Nasar is in fact innocent, but none of the mysteries through the book are solved and the book concludes in an abrupt manner. The title of the book, “A Chronicle of a Death Foretold,” suggests that the story be told in chronological order, but the information revealed in each chapter jumps from time to time from varying sources. This comes from the idea that the chronicle is incomplete– something that the narrator notices in his investigation: “I searched many times with the water up to my ankles in that lagoon of lost causes, and after five years rummaging around only chance let me rescue some 322 pages filched from the more than 500 that the brief must have contained” (Marquez, 99). Here, the narrator doesn’t recover all the information that was involved in the case, resulting in his story to be incomplete. However, even through all of his interviews with people, he still never did discover who the culprit was that took Angela Vicario’s virginity. It is mentioned multiple times that Santiago was never seen with her, and that Angela could be protecting someone that really does love her. So then why does she return to Bayardo? Another important part of this chapter lies in this sentence: “Most of all, 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 ties into the magical realism– the magistrate never thought it could be possible that there would be so many coincidences to prevent people from intervening in the murder that was so clearly announced. The magical realism aspect is fate, and that nothing was able to prevent the death of Santiago Nasar– seen in his dream the night before.
I agree with what you said about the magical realism employed by the narrator when describing the magistrate's opinion of the events. No amount of coincidences could occur unless Nasar had some predetermined fate to die that morning. However, I have some criticism of your assumption that Angela was protecting someone who loved her. All we know is that she didn't want to reveal who really took her virginity. She could have been raped and been too ashamed to admit it. She went back to Bayardo because her mother was right, she learned to love him.
During chapter four of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, the narrator reveals some of the aftermath of Angela Vicario’s sending home, and specifically talks about the effects it had on Bayardo San-Roman. Marquez writes, “the only one who had lost everything was Bayardo San Roman: “poor Bayardo,” as he was remembered over the years” (Marquez 96). Bayardo, as the narrator explains, “lost everything.” Angela’s lack of virginity turned his world upside down; he lost the love of his life and his life in general. You know your life is bad when you are know as “poor (name).” The thing that makes it even worse is that none of it was in his control. He had no way of knowing that Angela was not a virgin, it was only societal norms that forced him to return her. Societal norms really rear their ugly head here, as they were, of course, the main cause of Santiago’s death and the towns shamefully apathetic cover-up. These horrific events caused Bayardo to attempt suicide by binge drinking during a sudden bout of depression. Marquez writes, “Bayardo San-Roman was unconscious on the bed… there were empty bottles on the floor and many more unopened beside the bed” (Marquez 97). This act is not entirely surprising after the events of the previous days, but this rash act seems to display something else in San-Roman: he leaps into decisions too quickly. This is supported by previous events in the book such as his courting and marriage of Angela. Instead of getting to know her over a period of time, he rushes in with his money and power, proposing and marrying quickly. It is possible that he would not have married Angela had he not been so hurried, thus preventing his eventual rejection of her and subsequent suicide attempt.
In the final chapter of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez uses very brutal, graphic diction and visual imagery to, as vividly and accurately as possible, describe the murder of Santiago Nasar, a seemingly abrupt but fitting conclusion to the the novel. After all, it foreshadows the killing in the title, so it only makes sense to include it in the novel (although not necessarily at the end; being a famous author though, he can do what he wants). After the Vicario brothers manage to track Nasar down, Marquez writes, “Desperate, Pablo Vicario gave him a horizontal slash on the stomach, and all his intestines exploded out” (Marquez 141). This is possibly a case of too much information, but it gives great detail to the text nonetheless. In addition, it fits well with the rest of the novella, which features numerous instances of profane, grotesque, and vulgar diction. In a sense, these harsh words add a touch of realism that contrasts some of the confusing, blurred elements of magical realism that pepper this piece along with the unique, and at times unclear, plot. What seems very strange to me is that the narrator knows all of these facts. How would one be able to vividly describe a slaying, if they were not present and watching it for themselves? This contrast of realism and otherworldly powers make the narrator one of the most interesting, and probably the most mysterious, characters in the book, and this contrast is also one of the main points of intrigue for the story.
Utilizing revolting diction in Chapter 4 of A Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez displays how Santiago Nasar’s dignity and body has been defiled by his ordeal. Throughout the book Marquez hints using symbolism to employ that Santiago Nasar is innocent. Therefore by killing Santiago Nasar, they defiled his body, which was symbolized to be pure due to the white clothing he was wearing. During the autopsy, an inexperienced medical student and a pastor performed the autopsy of the body (The medical student actually alludes to the victim of a real story that the Chronicle of a Death Foretold is based on). As they perform the autopsy, due to the unsanitary conditions and lack of sufficient technology, on Santiago Nasar’s body “...a syrup-colored liquid began to flow from the wounds” (74). Using the words “syrup-colored” and “wounds” conjures a dominant effect of sympathy to imply that Nasar’s body is defiled. This also supports that Nasar was innocent since the reader feels bad for Nasar’s defiled body, they can safely assume that he was not the one who took Angela Vicario’s virginity. Or, if he did take her virginity, this description could be showing that Marquez believed that it was wrong to kill him though the ordeal was a matter of honor to the townspeople. He wants to make a statement that any reason for killing cannot justify such a horrendous action. Though his body was defiled the narrator still found his body “ a useful piece of evidence” to show that there was something of use that came out of the autopsy. Like a final attempt to prove his own innocence.
I am impressed by the conclusion you made, "a final attempt to prove his own innocence." I definitely had not considered something like that. It could play into the magical realism aspect of the story, and suggest that Nasar still lives on in the town. The stench throughout the town is another example of this. This is probably Marquez's way of showing that Nasar believed himself to be innocent of water crime he was accused of.
The tragic loss of Santiago played a roll on not just the citizens, but the underlying theme of the story. Santi’s death was justified by the accusation of an affair with Angela, even though there was no evidence that Santi took Angela’s virginity. Which brings up the underlying question in the book, can any horrible action be justified through justice? Did Santiago Nasar deserve to die? And was it right of his killers to decide his fate, and take Justice into their own hands? As the reader progresses into the book, they find worse and worse things about santiago. We begin the story with the idea that Santiago was a respectable man who was loved by all, but then we find he is an alcoholic and wakes up with a hang over each monday, and he molested Divina, and as the rumor has it, took the virginity of his own sister. But do all these things stacked up justify his death? Can one really call judgement for Santi?
In the final chapter of A Chronicle of a Death Foretold, a detailed description of the event of Santiago Nasar’s stabbing is given at the end of the book. The way Nasar was killed alludes to the death of Jesus Christ. In a way, Nasar symbolized Christ throughout the story. The white clothes symbolizing his purity, his name often mentioned as two names and finally here in the last chapter, the way he was killed. In Jesus’s death on the cross, his palms, and feet were impaled by nails. Then after many hours, the guards that patrolled him stabbed him in his side to make sure he was dead. A similarity can be seen when the Vicario brothers first attacks Nasar “The knife went through the palm of his right hand and then sank into his side up to the hilt. Everybody heard his cry of pain” (117). This similarity is significant because it may be hinting at the innocence of Nasar and the guilt that should have been put on the Vicario brothers. Another similarity is made is that stabs that he received held him up “against the door” (119), which alludes to the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. The “crucifixion” of Santiago Nasar could symbolize a sacrifice, the sacrifice of his life for honor. It shows how Nasar’s had been a sacrifice, implying his innocence in taking the virginity of Angela Vicario. At the same time, Marquez denounces the killing for honor since the death of Christ had its benefits as well as it being a heinous crime. Marquez employs that honor should not be a justification for the killing by using such detailed description of the gruesome death.
I think this is a very unique and interesting analysis. I myself have never thought of this. I would like to contradict this with the fact that Santiago was the most un-christ like person. Have you considered that he could possibly be represented as satan? He seems to be more represented as satan as he was a drunk and he violated Divina, and to the belief of many, he took Angelas virginity.
Gabriel Garcia Marquez uses religious influence, honor and revenge to characterize the setting of “A Chronicle of a Death Foretold”. The novel takes place in the 1950’s in a small coastal town in Colombia. Religion was a central part of this society at this point in time. The narrator emphasizes the importance of attending mass when he/she explains how their mother never left the house. Marquez writes, “she hadn’t gone out into the street in years, not even to attend mass”(20). This gives the reader some idea of the cultural expectation that nearly everyone attended mass. The day prior to Santiago’s death was a wedding. The narrator explains that everyone took part in this huge celebration in one way or another. This idea is continued by the arrival of the bishop. For this celebration, nearly the whole town gathers on the docks. Religious ceremonies, such as weddings and a visit from the bishop, were widely celebrated because of the value of religion in this culture. Religion also influenced societal expectations. Citizens would go to no end in attempt to protect their family name and honor. Later in the novel, it is revealed that Santiago died because he took Angela Vicario’s virginity. For a women in that time to be married for the first time and wear white, then later have it be revealed that she isn’t a virgin, both the marriage and the family of the bride would be seen as dishonorable. In a town of this small size, it would be nearly impossible for any person involved in such an impure act to carry on with their lives. It is to protect this honor that the Vicario brothers saw it fit to murder Santiago Nasar. A revenge of this sort was not seen as completely unreasonable to the general population of this heavily religious, small coastal town. This society saw no limitations in the quest to protect their religious beliefs and honor by any means necessary, especially revenge.
ReplyDeleteIn the beginning chapter of Chronicle of a Death Foretold by Gabriel Garcia Marquez, we can already see elements of magical realism, a style of writing, in his book. These specific elements include references to the supernatural, which helps to connect the real world with extraordinary concepts. In addition, we can see how the book is setup in terms of how it introduces new characters and how it explains the plot.
ReplyDeleteWhen Clotilde Armenta first saw Santiago Nasar in the square, she commented how “He already looked like a ghost” (15). Not only does this foreshadow Nasar’s impending fate (which we already know to happen from the first sentence of the novel), but it also references a supernatural element: a ghost. The use of this reference helps to connect the real world that the characters live in to abnormal concepts. Also, the use of dreaming in this story helps to give another supernatural, yet real, element to the world. When Nasar told his mother, Placida Linero, about a dream he had last night to which Linero replied “Any dream about birds means good health” (6). As we can see, however, she is mistaken.
In addition, the way the novel is structured is very interesting, as this structure of plot is not present in a lot of books. Garcia Marquez starts off the novel by revealing the end of the plot (Nasar’s death), and then proceeds to reveal information of how it all occurred. The purpose of this style is to create more suspense in the plot, despite already knowing the outcome. The slow reveal of information about characters and how they connect to the plot keep the reader interested in the plot. It also makes the novel seem like a “cold case” type of criminal investigation, where the narrator returns years after the event actually occurred.
Through the first chapter in Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez reveals the challenges and difficulties that humans face with memory by the use of doubtful diction. Throughout the book, many characters give their own descriptions of what they remember happened on the day of Santiago Nasar’s death. Through the journalistic style of Marquez’s novel, he uses the narrator to depict their memories. The uncertainty of these memories is seen through the doubtful diction. The narrator states, “No one was certain if…” (Marquez 4), “But most agreed that…” (4), “...she had the impression that…” (14), and “The only thing that I can remember is that…” (23). All of these irresolute statements carry doubt in them and show how the power of memory can sometimes fail. Especially in a fatal and legal incident like this, the failure of memory is rather unfortunate as it makes it difficult to come to a precise and final decision. Unfortunately, this causes many problems in court and legal cases where there are varying accounts of the same scenario. As time goes on, memories often tend to fade away which just builds on the certainty of an account. This poses a huge challenge for court officials to come to a conclusion as they must decipher all the information and come to one conclusive decision. This challenge of memory is explored more throughout the rest of the novel while it narrates different characters’ accounts of the death of Santiago.
ReplyDeleteI liked your analysis on doubtful diction present throughout Chapter 1 and how it emphasizes the inaccuracy of memory towards the subject of Santiago's death. However I would like to add that this also supports the tone of the novel and the theme of mystery prevalent in the novel. The reader is then hooked into the book and wants to keep reading in order to find out what's to happen next.
DeleteGabriel Garcia Marquez uses a very uniquely journalistic writing style in the first chapter (and in subsequent chapters as well) to add a sort of realistic interest to the text. First of all, this work starts off in the opening sentence with, “On the morning they were going to kill him…” (Marquez 1). In effect, this gives away the “ending” of the story. However, this is not as odd as it seems, as it fits along with the journalistic style that Marquez uses when writing this; the narrator basically tells the events in an article-like fashion, providing insights and quotations from many different characters that either took part in, witnessed, or mostly ignored the events of the day Santiago Nasar gets killed. This opening line acts as a metaphorical headline to this article. As for the realism aspect, Marquez provides many versions of the events in an effort to tell the whole story, as one would do in real life when attempting to decipher a complex situation like what gets portrayed in this novella. Another unique aspect of this work is its nonlinearity. As discussed above, Marquez references the death of Santiago Nasar, something that happened towards the end of the timeline of events, right in the opening lines. This structure can add confusion, but again ties into the journalistic approach Marquez takes. The most interesting bits of a news article always get placed at the top and in the headline. This is used to catch the reader’s eye hopefully forcing them to read more, which probably worked in the case of this book, as it is still widely read.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with your analysis about how Garcia Marquez uses a journalistic style of writing in order to catch and hold the reader’s attention, and how it is very similar to a news story or headline. I also believe that he uses this writing style in order to create suspense in the plot. It is also very interesting how although a news article is supposed to give facts and to inform the reader of everything he or she needs to know, the reader is still left with some unanswered questions by the end of the book. The ending is very abrupt, and this is due not only to the journalistic approach that Garcia Marquez takes, but also the disorientation of time and somewhat random order of events.
DeleteMy first impression of the book was that i thought it was rather strange how they foreshadow Santiago's death from the first chapter. I also have yet to find a purpose for this book, it seems to be without a plot thus far. So what i, the reader, would assume is that the book is just telling of events leading up to Santiago's death. Santiago was described as being slim and pale, which gives us foreshadowing of his death, as he resembles a cadaver. My first impression of the story gives me the impression that its a sort of ‘Who done-it’ kind of novel, a short murder mistery, and we start with Santiagos death and work our way backwards. I found it strange the fact that so many people knew that Santiago would be killed, yet somehow he didn’t know himself.
ReplyDeleteMarquez repeatedly uses ghostly diction to reiterate that Nasar’s death was not an accident, nor completely a crime of vengeance, causing the reader to be more intrigued and “sit in the edge of their seats.” Santiago Nasar was the only known Arab in the small Latin-American village he lived in. He was wealthy, intelligent, and peaceful; all the reason for him to be the target. He was an outsider to the town despite being born and raised there. Marquez writes, “He was just like his father… A shit” (Marquez 10). Nasar had people who disliked him, just like everyone else in this world, and just like his father. Although Nasar shared many traits with his father, he was light skinned, and this is referenced multiple times by the narrator and Victoria Guzman. It is also referenced in how most people in the first chapter remember Nasar as always dead. Between Flor’s comment on his hands “frozen and stony, like the hands of a deadman” (13), and Armenta’s remark of “He already looked like a ghost” (15) and the narrator’s mother, seconds before finding out that Nasar was killed, “You always have to take the side of the dead” (23). By constantly stating that Nasar was already close to death before he had actually died, the reader can assume that most of these characters were expecting, if not hoping for his death. It was established that everyone in the town knew that the murder was going to occur, and the “official” reason was given, however no one did anything to prevent it, insinuating that people didn’t care if he lived or died. This can be interpreted in multiple ways. Either Nasar was intimidating to the rest of the village, so they wanted him out of the picture, he had developed enough of a reputation as a playboy that everyone believed the claim, or Nasar was discriminated against and persecuted for simply being different than everyone else which made him an easy target to blame. Perhaps it is a combination of these things.
ReplyDeleteAs I read through the first chapter of the Chronicle of a Death Foretold one of the most significant feature I noticed was the description of the Vicario brothers. First, I found it unusual how an investigator could know such details about the brothers but I was also intrigued by the tone that is conjured during their description. The tone conveyed in their descriptions invoked feelings of sadness mixed with a vibe of hesitance. Using simile Marquez reflects the importance of pride and honor in the culture of Santiago Nasar’s city in this description. The two Vicario brothers were described as “insomniac sleepwalkers” indicating that something was troubling them (15). But when they saw Santiago Nasar “instinct awoke” them (15). This instinct could be referring to their motivation for killing which was to avenge the lost honor of their sister. But before they were reminded of their objective, such an action may have bothered them in some degree. This shows that the culture in the story values honor more than anything because honor would even drive people to murder though it may have been forced. Which explains why Santiago Nasar’s killing is not such a horrendous crime in which they live because its justification is sufficient to the townspeople.
ReplyDeleteAnother important symbol i believe for the brothers is the fact that they are twins. In fact they “looked so much alike that it was difficult to tell them apart” (15). The difficulty in identifying which brother is who may connote to the same expectation of men in which they are born into. As if they were just servants whom needed not to be identified correctly and only live to protect the honor of the family. All through chapter one they are always mentioned together and never separately which may hint at lack of control of themselves. Lacking in unique personality, portraying them as more of monsters, but rebuttled with the regretful tone used in their descriptions shows how gender roles has affected the decision of the twins to kill Santiago Nasar
Chronicle of a Death Foretold gives a look into an almost unbelievable situation, of humans being so apathetic as to completely disregard the intentions of murder. The author presents this through magical realism. Magical realism uses language to portray an event that may seem ridiculous as something real. For example, an entire town having knowledge of a murder about to take place and no one doing anything about it.
ReplyDeleteThe story is told in a journalistic manner, piecing together events taken from different stories being told. The mood changes with each new interviewee– when speaking with Santiago Nasar’s mother, she makes Santiago out to be a perfect man, awaiting the bishop after getting married only a few days before. In the section with Santiago’s mother, he is referred as such: “By his nature, Santiago Nasar was merry and peaceful, and openhearted” (8). Along with this, he’s made out to be sensitive as his mother says, “He was dressed in white linen that had been washed in plain water because his skin was so delicate that it couldn’t stand the noise of starch” (7). Here, Santiago is seen to be sweet and sensitive, as a mother would see their son.
However, the reader gets a different perspective when they follow the description of Victoria Guzmán. She says, “Another man like that hasn’t even been born again. He was just like his father, a shit” (10). Here we see how he’s perceived as a bad guy- completely different than his mother’s perspective. Victoria also says: “He always got up with the face of a bad night” (9). This reveals more of his character, seemingly less delicate and sensitive than his mother says and a worse man. He’s mentioned to have seduced Victoria and the other servant, showing just how bad he can be. As the book continues, more perspectives will be revealed, and a clearer picture will come into place to describe Santiago’s character and the day of the murder.
In the second chapter of Chronicle of a Death Foretold by Gabriel Garcia Marquez, more is revealed about Angela Vicario, the woman who a new, mysterious man named Bayardo San Roman, is planning to marry. Garcia Marquez characterizes Angela Vicario as how a typical woman would have been during that time: submissive. He uses depressing language to convey how other people view Angela Vicario, as well as how she views herself in the world in which she lives.
ReplyDeleteThe narrator’s mother, Placida Linero, gives insight into what a “perfect” woman, or at least was considered to be “perfect” at the time, would be like. She talked about how the Vicario sisters know how to “do screen embroidery, sew by machine, weave bone lace, wash and iron, make artificial flowers and fancy candy, and write engagement announcements” (ii.31). At the time, it would have been a man’s dream to marry one of the Vicario sisters. Shortly after, Linero says “Any man will be happy with them because they’ve been raised to suffer” (ii.31). The use of depressing language by Linero shows how at this time period, women were not in the most enjoyable position, at least by modern standards. Later in the chapter, Angela Vicario herself says how “The only thing I prayed to God for was to give me the courage to kill myself” (ii.37). Although most people thought that she was living a great life, especially since she was about to marry a very rich and “charming” man, she was depressed about her situation. The fact that Angela Vicario is asking for the courage to kill herself shows how society at the time can push people to hope for such terrible things.
In the second chapter of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez reveals the cultural norms during the time of Santiago Nasar’s death. It is very clear that religion plays a large part in shaping the community’s way of life and influencing their values and morals (this can be shown through the importance of the Bishop’s arrival to town in the first chapter). One of the most prominent cultural norms that is presented in Marquez’s novel is the idea of arranged marriages. This also uncovers the fact that women were expected to be submissive and fall under the control of their husband. When Bayardo San Roman first arrives in town, he has the intention of finding a wife and he immediately chooses Angela Vicario just based off of appearance. He woos her with his extravagance and money. Marquez writes, “Besides, Bayardo San Roman hadn’t even tried to court her, but he had bewitched the family with his charm” (Marquez 34). Because of this, he knows he will get any woman he wants and he knows that the woman will have no choice but to obey. Another expectation that was normal during this time period that was present in marriages was the assumption that the new wife was to be a virgin and that her husband was to be the one to take her virginity. This corresponds to the Christian value that the first time one has sex it will be with their spouse. However, the expectations that surround sex serve as a double standard during this era. While the women were supposed to be virgins until the night of their marriage, it was acceptable for men to go to whorehouses or brothels (in this case it is called Maria Alejandrina Cervante’s house of mercies) and have casual sex whenever they pleased. Through these cultural norms, Marquez is able to reveal the inequality between men and women and show how they were seen as “normal” during their time period.
ReplyDeleteThrough Gabriel Garcia Marquez’s third chapter in his novel Chronicle of a Death Foretold, the author reveals the importance of honor and reputation during the time period of the novel. The Vicario twins justify their murder on the terms that they did it to preserve their sister’s honor. The opening sentence of the chapter states, “The lawyer stood by the thesis of homicide in legitimate defense of honor, which was upheld by the court in good faith…” (Marquez 48). The view of one’s honor was so important to the community that even the judge excused the twins for their crime. In accordance to today’s values, this murder would be unforgivable as the law usually does not take into account motives. The societal norm that one’s honor must be protected was so strong that the fact that someone was killed in order to preserve one was overlooked, even by the priest Father Amador. Immediately after Pedro and Pablo Vicario killed Santiago, they ran to the church to confess. One of the ten commandments states that one shall not murder. However, Father Amador excuses their immoral behavior as he believes it was the right thing to do for the Vicario family and their sister. The twins say, “‘We killed him openly, but we are innocent’”... “‘Before God and before men, it was a matter of honor” (35). Father Amador agrees with the twins because of the belief that reputation and honor override everything else in their society. Unfortunately, this way of thinking has brainwashed the community into excusing such horrific crimes.
ReplyDeleteIn the third chapter of Chronicle of a Death Foretold by Gabriel Garcia Marquez, we can observe more of the recurring motif of neglect and ignorance, especially towards Santiago Nasar’s impending assassination. When questioned by the narrator about why they didn’t warn Santiago Nasar of the Vicario brothers’ plans of murdering him, many said that they didn’t think that the Vicario brothers were serious.
ReplyDeleteWhen Clotilde Armenta wakes her husband, Don Rogelio de la Flor, and tells him of what the Vicario brothers are going to do, de la Flor replies, “Don’t be silly…Those two aren’t about to kill anybody, much less someone rich” (iii.55). This neglecting behavior not only shows how Don Rogelio de la Flor did not think much of the Vicario brothers’ threats, but also how he does not believe in his wife that she is telling the truth. Later, Colonel Lazaro Aponte says how when he found them in Coltilde Armenta’s store, he “thought they were nothing but a pair of big bluffers” (iii.56). Despite the Vicario brothers openly stating that they were going to “cut Santiago Nasar’s guts out” (iii.59), many people like Apote and Faustino Santos, the butcher, believed that “they were kidding around” (iii.59). When the narrator asked his brother about the events, his brother said that he did not remember them. However, he also said, “Who the f***k would ever think that the twins would kill anyone, much less with a pig knife!” (iii.69). This demonstrates how even when someone does not recall the events that occurred, he or she can still show neglect and disregard for the severity of a situation.
You had an insightful analysis about the motif of neglect in chapter 3 using multiple character examples to show this pattern. What i found the most interesting of all the quotes is the narrator's brother's dialogue. His use of vulgar diction and direct approach creates an enraged tone, as if he was angry about the twins being accused of going to kill Santiago Nasar. But I believe that his anger could also indicate how the town feels partly to blame for Nasar's murder, so the brother feels attacked by the narrator. Also I noticed you commented twice already. I think we only have to comment once a day since we should only have seven total entries, including the commenting homework for next class.
DeleteAt the beginning of chapter two, Gabriel Garcia-Marquez portrays Bayardo San-Roman as an almost God-like figure. Here, the narrator’s mother states such things as, “he challenged the most skillful swimmers, who were many, and left them behind by twenty strokes in crossing the river and back” and “it also seems that he’s swimming in gold” (Marquez 29). It seems everyone gets quite impressed by this new man in the village. However, the reasons for why they become impressed seem sort of cloudy. The narrator’s mother uses these praises of him, as well as a few others, which give paint San-Roman as quite a remarkable (somewhat impossibly so) character. That he can actually do all of these things seems sort of unlikely, but one undeniable quality of San-Roman is he very wealthy. After all, he is the son of a war hero. Anyway, this presents a possible explanation for his exorbitantly high esteem in town. In a small village, probably lacking an abundance of wealth, a rich man like San-Roman would certainly draw some attention. This is most likely the reason that Angela Vicario was forced, by her own mother, to marry him. His wealth was certainly a strong determining factor (that and Angela’s mother does not get portrayed as a great human being; she beats her daughter when it is discovered she is not a virgin). It seems that one of the only characters with a negative first impression of San-Roman is the narrator. This is not all that surprising though, as the narrator has his own God-like insight into the minds of all characters (some magic realism at work?).
ReplyDeleteThroughout this chapter, we are beginning to see the various social conventions present in the culture of this village. Women are brought up to be wives, to act proper and be helpful to their husbands. Men, on the other hand, are meant to be providers and may do whatever they please. The Vicarios’ mother says, “The brothers were brought up to be men. The girls had been reared to get married” (García Marquez, 30). Bayardo San Román is a wealthy, attractive man, coming from a prestigious family. This presents the perfect opportunity for the Vicarios to marry of their daughter, Angela. In this culture, marriage is not meant to be a reunion of love, but rather a strategy to unite families and give the best reputation possible. The mother again says: “Love can be learned too” (35). Speaking of reputations, Angela Vicario ruins the reputation of her family with an action against the standards acceptable for women. Women are meant to be virgins until marriage, and be loyal to only their husband. Men, on the other hand, are free to have premarital sex and even have other relations while they are married. The narrator, Santiago, and Cristo are all drinking and playing in a whorehouse while the women must sit alone at home. These are double standards, completely against the women. Once Bayardo discovers his wife is not a virgin, suddenly she is “tainted” and returned to her family for her mother to beat her daughter until she loses hope. Losing virginity before marriage is seen as a crime– however, while it is the woman’s fault for sleeping with a man before she’s to be married, the man is blamed for the action. Angela’s twin brothers view the crime as someone taking their sister and their family’s honor, and the only way to resolve it is to murder the man responsible. This shows just how important reputation is in their society, that they would take someone’s life simply to restore theirs.
ReplyDeleteThe interesting thing about the murder of Santiago Nasar is that it was committed by two men believed to be good people, and that no one believed they would carry out the action. However, because the motive to kill Santiago was because he had taken their sister’s honor and virginity, some believed that the murder was justified and even necessary. Pablo Vicario’s fiancée even tells him that she won’t marry him if he doesn’t murder Santiago and retrieve his sister’s honor. The twins are also released three years following the murder, so they did not receive harsh punishments for the crime either. Does this mean the murder was justified? A man taking away a woman’s purity seems to defile reputation of family and ruin the woman’s life (before marriage). The twins appear to relate Santiago Nasar to a pig, as their first thought is to go to the butcher shop and take out and sharpen butcher knives. It is not good enough to find a gun and end his life quickly; rather, they prefer to draw out his death and treat him as a hunk of meat, meant to be torn apart. In other cases, perverted men have been called “pigs” in real life. Here, Santiago Nasar is related to a pig because he took Angela’s virginity, and he is treated as such when they take his life. Even while the brothers are running around town, finding and sharpening their knives, everyone around town has no suspicion that the murder will actually take place. Just because people usually present a respectable façade, does it mean that they will uphold that? If the townspeople are so easily deceived by a familiar face, how often does this happen in real life? The Vicario brothers got away with it, and even had their crime justified because of the situation.
ReplyDeleteChapter Two focuses on the groom, Bayardo San Román and the bride’s family, the Vicarios. The narrator keeps contradicting himself on his characterization of San Román. At times he praises him on his wealth and kindness, but maintains that he “was not a man to be known at first sight” (Márquez 26). The intended effect of this is to cause the reader to question the narrator’s perspective. Quite often in chapter 1 the narrator would bring something up that seemed to be significant, then never explain its significance, even indirectly. By questioning the narrator on this occasion, we are lead to question him in others. What’s important? What isn’t? An example of this questioning is found in Nasar’s obsession with predicting how much San Román is spending on the wedding. The reader is forced to assume that money is significant to society because of how much San Román is spending, but why is Nasar, the man we later know to be accused of taking Angela’s virginity, the one who obsesses over it? What is it about him? Perhaps it is a representation of machismo; whoever can spend more money is more macho and suited for Angela. But that would imply that Nasar wishes to marry Angela, and there has been no evidence for that. Overall, the narrator’s style and perspective confuses readers, causing them to question the events and opinions in the story.
ReplyDeleteChapter three further delves into the society that constitutes the setting in this story. Gabriel Garcia-Marquez writes:
ReplyDelete“We killed him openly,” Pedro Vicario said, “but we are innocent.”
“Perhaps before God,” said Father Amador.
“Before God and before man,” Pablo Vicario said. “It was a matter of honor.”
This quotation is quite profound in the scope of the novel in that it largely portrays the society’s feelings on the matter of the murder. At the time this book in which this book was set, the sense of “honor” (which gets used here and many other places and becomes a major theme) is extremely important. In a sense, it was not only expected but also necessary for the Vicario brothers to carry out this murder thus avenging her alleged loss of virginity. Had they not killed Santiago, they would have been seen as weak and cowardly, an ultimate hit to their reputations. This last point is further supported later on in the story when it gets revealed that Prudencia Cotes waits three years, the length of the brothers’ imprisonment, to marry Pablo Vicario. She even explains that she would not have married him had he not carried out the horrific act. This was just what was expected at the time from everyone. Lastly, the idea of protecting the family honor is supported throughout the village. This is why the many townspeople neglect to intervene, warn Santiago Nasar, or do anything helpful whatsoever to prevent the killing of a possibly innocent man.
Gabriel Garcia Marquez uses deceptive diction to characterize Bayardo San Roman in his novel, A Chronicle of a Death Foretold. Just after Bayardo San Roman arrives in town, Marquez writes, “He seemed more serious to me that his antics would have led one to believe, and with a hidden tension that was barely concealed by his excessive good manners”(pg 28). Angela Vicario describes him this way and makes it clear that she doesn't see him as genuine. Marquez uses phrases like “led one to believe” because it implies that Bayardo leads everyone to believe he is a perfect, god like character when the reality is quite different. The way in which he does this is by lying to everyone. Rather, he omits his flaws. This characteristic is shown through the use of the word “concealed”. This is the second time that Marquez describes Bayardo using this word. It is fitting because of Bayardo’s ability to hide his flaws from everyone. Everyone, meaning all except for the woman he wishes to marry. Angela never makes clear the exact characteristic of Bayardo that make him so undesirable except that he uses his wealth, rather that the content of his character, to court her. Marquez makes this feature notable by using the word “excessive” to describe Bayardo’s manners. Although it may not seem bad, necessarily, to have an excess of manners, the word excessive has a negative connotation. A man of such high socioeconomic status is expected to have an excess of many things. However, being in excess of a characteristic such as manners may lead others to believe that he is hiding something. This is in fact the case because at this point, almost nothing is known about where he came from or why. Such deception characterizes Bayardo San Roman through the use of deceptive diction.
ReplyDeleteGabriel Garcia Marquez uses barbaric diction to foreshadow the life the twins will lead following the murder. Just after the twins killed Santiago Nasar, Gabriel Garcia Marquez describes them, “...exhausted from the barbarous work of death, and they're closed in arms were soaked and their faces smeared with sweat and still living blood, but the preist recalled the surrender as a great act of dignity”(pg 49). The twins are described as exhausted and covered in blood, just as a hunter would be following the death of his prey. Thousands of years prior to setting of this novel, people on earth lived very simple lives. They would find shelter, food and reproduce. More barbaric ways of life were guided less by morals and more by honor. In this way, the characters in this novel have a lot in common with ancient people. The practice of killing your friend as a result of betrayal is not a very progressive way of thinking. However, in this period and in ancient societies it was not frowned upon at all as long as it was done to protect the family’s honor. They protect the family name in the same way that ancient men would protect the people in their tribe. They would kill any threat to their tribe in brutal ways. Santiago Nasar was not shot with a gun. Instead, he was repeatedly stabbed with knives and left incredibly mangled. Following this incident, the twins would go to prison. Life in prison is very simplistic. Prisoners eat and sleep with very little activity in between. This is again related to ancient lives. Marquez uses barbaric diction to describe the twins to foreshadow the simplicity of their lives following the killing of Santiago Nasar.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with your analysis of how some of the characters’ behavior in this novel, such as the Vicario brothers’, can be connected the behaviors of people in ancient times. I never thought to think that far back and to connect it to this novel. However, I also believe that the bystanders in Chronicle of a Death Foretold don’t really match ancient behaviors. If honor was so important to both the characters in the novel as well as in ancient times, wouldn’t they try to stick up for someone who was being attacked, especially if that person was significant to someone else, such as the other Arab members of the community?
DeleteChapter 3 concerns itself with the events before the murder, chronologically before chapter 1. The chapter deals with the excuses of the public through concepts like honor and disbelief. The Vicario brothers took it upon themselves to defend the honor of their sister and their family, and the way they see best to do this is by killing the one who caused them the dishonor, Nasar. Although, even after they kill Nasar, we later learn the flee the town because of the uproar the entire family has caused. This brings into question if honor is only a social construct, or if it is actually something felt by people universally. The brothers did what they believed would set things right, but it proved in the end to accomplish nothing. The narrator never fails to say that the brothers are good people, “the prisoners remembered them for their good character and sociability” (Márquez 48). But he also does mention that they never showed regret, and the murder seemed to be more passionate than they really let on, forcing the reader to decide whether the crime was justified or not. The rest of the village knew about the impending murder, yet no one did anything to ward Nasar; everyone that wanted to had some sort of excuse as to why they didn’t. The police officer claimed that he had broken up enough fights the previous night so he wouldn’t concern himself in the matter. Faustino Santos assumed that it was a joke because the brothers had their knives sharpened twice, after the first set was taken away from them. Numerous people heard them shouting it in the market, and still no one did anything. They all claimed that it either wasn’t their concern, it wasn’t anything to be concerned about, or that someone else would make it their concern.
ReplyDeleteWhat is interesting in the second chapter is the similarity in the role of women and men between the Chronicle of a Death Foretold, the Taming of the Shrew and A Doll’s House. In the journalistic style book of the Chronicle Death Foretold, the women are expected to act as a median for the family to attain riches. The relationship between Angela Vicario and Bayardo San Roman is built upon this expectation. The narrator states that “Angela Vicario who didn’t want to marry him” (34) ended up still marrying San Roman because his family was rich. Then Angela’s family who was poor will have a share in the wealth of San Roman. She was beautiful, but she was not a virgin. This is what starts the main conflict of the book; Angela failing to be the ideal wife like her sisters who were “reared up to get married”(31). In the Taming of the Shrew, were expected to be submissive and to work for the man. In a Doll’s House, women are like the decorations for the husband, just how San Roman chose Angela for her beauty and essentially her virginity to increase his own pride. Women can also work in Chronicle of a Death Foretold, but seem to be limited to decorative work like embroidery. With similarities in the discrimination of women, this could also indicate a similarity in the purpose of the story. Marquez could also be making a statement about the objectification of women and how discriminatory it is. I also stated that there is also a motif of men in all these stories. All of the men married so far have a sense of pride in their wealth as well as viewing wealth as an attractive trait for men. So, the purpose of the story may not be a feminist message but more humanist; including the role of the expectations of men in marriage for convenience. If men and women were not expected to be treated like objects in marriage, then marriage may be bounded by love instead of money or beauty.
ReplyDeleteIn chapter 3, the reader discovers the weight of the crime that the Vicario brothers had committed. In our society any murder despite any reason is a heinous crime requiring a serious punishment. But in the magical realism of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Marquez asks the question if there is any justification for murder, and if so to what degree. The society of Santiago Nasar values honor more than anything. This is evident by Bayardo San Roman’s anger for Santiago Nasar supposedly taking Angela’s virginity. The Vicario brothers used the reason of honor to defend themselves of their innocence “‘ Before God and before men,’ Pablo Vicario said. “It was a matter of honor’”(49). They would have even “done it a thousand times over for the same reason” (48). Showing absolutely no regret in their action, the Vicario brothers shows the reader that there is a justification for murder. Their personality is also taken into account by the older prisoners in that they had “good character and sociability”, which would be unusual for a bloodthirsty monster. This creates an effect of shock on the reader which allow them to receive the question about justification for murder. But there is a certain degree in which the justification can account for. This is the way of style of murder of the victim, which we also account for in our own society. The reason why the brothers were sentenced for a long time is because that the murder was so brutal that “it was necessary to use public funds to repair the main door of Placida Linero’s house” (49). While there may be an arguably a reason for a murder, there is no reason for such brutality.
ReplyDeleteIn the fourth chapter of A Chronicle of a Death Foretold, we get a better picture of the aftermath of Santiago Nasar’s death. Many characters such as the Vicario brothers, Bayardo San Roman, and Angela Vicario have separated and followed their own paths. The narrative now enters this quasi calm period, as the narrator now reveals what happened to many of the other characters after this tragedy.
ReplyDeleteEarly in the chapter, the author Gabriel Garcia Marquez describes the Vicario brothers as living in a very poor state in jail. The most “unbearable for [the Vicario brothers] in jail was their lucidity” (iv.79). However, not only was their terrible mental state a significant factor in their lives, but also the conditions of the jail. For Pedro Vicario, “The pain in his groin had reached his throat, his urine was shut off, and he suffered the frightful certainty that he wouldn’t sleep ever again for the rest of his life” (iv.80). Pablo Vicario suffered from chronic diarrhea after every meal. Later however, Pedro Vicario decides to enlist in the army again, but he is never heard of after that. Pablo Vicario became a goldsmith and married Prudencia Cotes. The Vicario brothers seem to be in poorer condition, or at least in a more distressed state, than the person who they killed previously.
In addition, we are also able to see the love that is still evident between Angela Vicario and Bayardo San Roman. Angela, living in Guajira, began to send letters to Bayardo San Roman, who was taken back by his family. Towards the end of the chapter, the narrator goes on to say how Bayardo comes back to visit Angela with all of the letters “arranged by date in bundles tied with colored ribbons, and they were all unopened” (iv.95). I took this to mean that Angela’s love for Bayardo is so strong, that the letters did not need to be opened and read in order to display her affection for him. The fact that she wrote him almost two thousand letters is enough to show Bayardo how she feels.
I like you analysis on the continued existence of love between Bayardo San Roman and Angela Vicario. I never thought about how the fact that Bayardo never opened one of the thousands of letters he received from Angela because it was enough evidence to show the extent of her love. However, I am still confused on why Angela suddenly became so in love with Bayardo after he left her when she previously did not want to marry him at all. Do you have any ideas on this?
DeleteIn the fifth and final chapter of Chronicle of a Death Foretold by Gabriel Garcia Marquez, the exact events of Santiago Nasar’s death are revealed. In addition, the nature of Nasar’s death is very strange and supernatural, and this further connects to the theme of the supernatural and extraordinary that is prevalent throughout the novel.
ReplyDeleteTowards the end of the novel, Santiago Nasar is finally killed by the Vicario brothers. He is brutally stabbed and mortally wounded, but the commentary provided by the Vicario brothers years later, as well as various supernatural events contradict his physical condition. When telling the narrator of their encounter with Santiago Nasar, one of the twins, Pedro Vicario, said “The strange thing is that the knife kept coming out clean...there wasn’t a drop of blood” (v.118). Normally people bleed when stabbed, so this unusual occurrence just adds to the supernatural ambiance of this novel. However, it doesn’t stop there. After Santiago has had his guts spilled by a horizontal slash through the stomach, “he walked more than a hundred yards, completely around the house, and went in through the kitchen door” (v.119). Everyone is shocked as a man who is carrying his guts in his hands is walking through a house. The use of this supernaturality helps to show how this world that the novel is based around is closer to the extraordinary world than we think. It also gives an eerie tone to the book and leaves the reader slightly confused and perplexed.
Nice analysis! I definitely saw some supernatural elements regarding the killing of Santiago Nasar. This theme of supernaturality ties in with overarching motif of magical realism. In this case, Marquez depicts realistic events with unrealistic diction and thoughts from the characters. Another instance of this, with regards to his death, in the story is when all of the townspeople talk about "smelling him." The smell of a dead man certainly could not linger that long, but in this case, it does. Most of this magical realism serves a symbolic purpose. In the case of the smell, it symbolizes the metaphorical "blood on the towns hands." In the case of the knife coming clean, I am not exactly sure what it means. As you said, it is, by nature, "confusing and perplexing."
DeleteAt the beginning of the fourth chapter in Chronicle of a Death Foretold, the narrator gives an in-depth and rich description of Santiago Nasar’s autopsy. While reading this chapter, I began to wonder about the ethics of an autopsy. If you already know how someone died, what is the point of destroying the body again? Is it right for the law to require an autopsy for a violent death when the body has already been massacred? I also began to think that although someone has died, you should still respect the body and give reverence. Although the characters in the book tried their best to maintain Nasar’s body in good condition by trying to preserve it for as long as possible with the available resources they had, I think that the autopsy was not necessary. The first line of the chapter states, “The damage from the knives was only a beginning for the unforgiving autopsy…” (Marquez 72). The priest who performed the autopsy states, “‘It was as if we killed him all over again after he was dead’” (72). He and the narrator seem to agree with my views as they say that the autopsy was “stupid,” “a massacre,” and “not entirely proper.” The narrator never mentions if the Nasar family had given consent for the autopsy to take place, but Marquez does write that it was “an order from the mayor.” Although it may have been a custom in their town to perform the procedure, I think that it should have ultimately been the family’s decision. The way that Nasar’s autopsy is described is very graphic. The narrator uses visual imagery to describe the aftermath. He states, “They gave us back a completely different body… The empty shell, stuffed with rags and quicklime and sewed up crudely with coarse twine and baling needles, was on the point of falling apart…” (77). Also the fact that the autopsy was not performed by a licensed professional and with craftsmen’s tool support the fact that “there hadn’t been any concern at all for the state of the body” (74). Marquez’s description of Nasar’s autopsy challenges the reader to think about the ethics of this procedure that is still practiced today.
ReplyDeleteIn the final chapter of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez finally describes Santiago Nasar’s death scene that was was originally mentioned in the first sentence of the book. Marquez’s novel, which surrounds the murder of a man who may or may not be innocent, turns out to be more of a novel about the events that took place at the time of the murder, rather than if Nasar was actually the man who took Angela Vicario’s virginity. In a way, I find this anticlimactic because it would be satisfying to know if Nasar was truly guilty and if he deserved such a fatal punishment.
ReplyDeleteThe title includes “Death Foretold” which shows how the people of the town knew about the possibility of the Vicario twins killing Nasar, but they had all thought that Nasar had already been warned about his killing. However, they were wrong and according to the narrator’s thoughts, he thought that Nasar had died without understanding his own death. The last sentence of the novel that wraps up Nasar’s death scene brings back the purpose of Marquez’s title. It states, “Then he went into his house through the back door that had been open since six and fell in his face in the kitchen” (Marquez 120). Nasar had been attacked in front of a door that had been locked and he was not able to save himself by running into his home. If he had had the time to run around his house to the back door, Nasar would still be alive. This final sentence shows that although his death may have been foretold, it could have been avoidable (both by the protection and knowledge from the townspeople and by the open back door).
I really like your analysis of how the plot comes full circle. The story starts with Nasar in his home and ends in the same place. He also concludes the book with a slight variation of the title. I think that this may represent the way Marquez views life in a circular manor and also gives the reader some purpose to the non-chronological order. It could also be a reference to karma. How everything that is done eventually comes back to the person. However, it is not known if Santiago Nasar was actually the one to commit the crime for which he was punished but I think that your analysis reveals a huge part of the plot that furthers the themes in this novel.
DeleteChapter 4 has two distinct purposes; the illustration of the aftermath of the murder and Angela’s newfound love for Bayardo San Román. Because the conflict between Angela and Bayardo is tangential to the main plot, that suggests that it holds some deep purpose for being included. However, I found the events after Nasar’s death to be much more interesting. Nasar’s autopsy was handled ridiculously, being done by Father Carmen Amador, someone who was in medical school but entered the seminary instead, because the local doctor was out of town. This shows law enforcement's lack of commitment to the case. They didn’t care what happened, or why it happened, they just wanted to deal with the issue quickly. The lack of respect to Nasar and his family is especially evident in how Father Carmen used common tools to autopsy the body, as well as how he threw away the internal organs with “an angry blessing” (76). The entire town came running to see what had happened, flying in like a flock of vultures. The smell of death in the air never left the town, from the moment of Nasar’s death. First, like the townsfolk, dogs were attracted, “they escaped from where they were and burst madly into the house” (Márquez 74). Rabid animals hounding the body were juxtaposed to the people of the town, suggesting that the dogs symbolize the animalistic curiosity of humanity. It also suggests that the humans who sat and watched are just as savage and cruel as the dogs actively trying to eat the dead body of Nasar. The smell of Nasar wafted through the entire village for quite some time. The narrator notes how his fiance attempted to sleep with him, possibly in an effort to take her mind off of the tragedy, then stopped because he smelled of Nasar. The Vicario twins probably had it the worst. They showered and washed themselves countless times, but they claimed they could still smell Nasar on them. Along with all the other maladies the Vicario twins encountered over the next couple of days, it seemed that they, along with the rest of the town, was cursed by Nasar. The smell over the town represents the entire guilt of the townsfolk, the smell growing stronger around those more directly involved in the murder of Nasar.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the autopsy done to Santiago Nasar is poorly executed, but it also gave me an interesting thought with the quote you provided. Why would he give "an angry blessing". Why would Marquez include such an oxymoron to characterize the priest. His anger could reflect the emotions of a supernatural power that seems to be present in the book. While the murder of Santiago Nasar was just to men, it may have not been just to God. I also liked how you compared the animals with humans because it gave me a better understanding of the stance of Marquez in if the townspeople should be held accountable for their actions or not
DeleteIn chapter 4 of his novel, A Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez uses Angela Vicario’s letters to symbolize yearning to convey human’s natural tendency to want what they can't have. When Bayardo San Roman first made his intentions with Angela clear, she had no interest in marrying him. She felt that he used his wealth and good looks to get the things he wanted rather than good character. She used the word “bewitched” to describe the effect he had on her family. She fought against marrying him, but eventually her family and cultural expectations won out. They got married but he ended up taking her back home just 5 hours after their marriage because he discovered that she wasn't a virgin. Following this discovery, Angela’s mother began beating her. As Angela recalls this beating decades later Marquez writes, “The blows hurt less because she knew they were for him”(pg 91). Angela showed no interest in Bayardo until she realized that she couldn't have him. She married him without love but fell for him the second he left. It's possible that after he left she simply fell in love with the idea of him. It's much easier to paint a pretty picture of someone when they're not around to prove that image wrong. So Angela started to write him letters. These letters expressed her longing to be with him. She never found anyone else to fill the void that he'd left and even became a virgin again for him. This yearning may have been brought on by feelings of guilt over not being the virgin and the wife that she wished she could be. Her dissatisfaction with herself led her to seek approval elsewhere. Bayardo did eventually return to her with thousands of unopened letters. Angela’s dream was never achieved because the cause of her yearning wasn't Bayardo, it was a lack of self esteem. The letters convey the theme that humans only want what they can't have, and even if they get what they want, it's never what they hoped for.
ReplyDeleteGabriel Garcia Marquez uses the magistrate’s ink to juxtapose life and death in chapter 5 of A Chronicle of a Death Foretold. Marquez writes, “The marginal notes, and not just because of the color of the ink, seemed to be written in blood”(pg 99). The blood represents death. Specifically, the death of Santiago Nasar whose death was the purpose of this report. The magistrate juxtaposes the ink and it's connection to blood with the things written in the ink. The narrator only shares two of the marginal notes but both seem to be life lessons. The first reads, “Give me a prejudice and I will move the world”(pg 100). The use of the word move signals the reader to interpret this note as a sort of progress, rather than a regret. This book is filled with guilt felt by other characters which is fitting since it centers around death. However, motion seems to invoke the opposite feeling of hope and life. The second margin note reads, “fatality makes us invisible”(pg 113). This quote means that no matter what is done in a person's life, it will eventually be forgotten because they will die and their legacy will be lost. This could also be interpreted as a positive thing. That maybe all sins and wrongdoings will be forgotten and so no one should be afraid to live because even the worst of mistakes can be healed by time. This is supported in the story by the Vicario brothers. They killed someone but they are still remembered by many as heroes for restoring honor to their family. These marginal notes serve as warnings for how to live, rather than how one may die. Life and death are juxtaposed through the symbolism of ink in A Chronicle of a Death Foretold.
ReplyDeleteIn chapter four, the autopsy of Santiago Nasar’s corpse tests the boundaries of what we believe to be ‘right’ and ethical. Along with the autopsy itself, the actual murder surpassed boundaries as well. First of all, a professional doctor did not perform the autopsy; rather, the priest was in charge of the ordeal. A priest’s job is to honor the dead and help people spiritually (in religion), and his participation in the autopsy completely contradicts that. The priest says himself, “’It was as if we killed him all over again after he was dead’” (Marquez, 72). Marquez uses visual imagery to display such a gruesome situation: “in the afternoon a syrup-colored liquid began to flow from the 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” (74). It was performed in a public school, meant for learning. Many people in the town were watching, crowded around the table to watch a man’s body be torn apart. Dogs were snarling in the distance, smelling the dead body. The entire situation was awful. Because his body was so destroyed from the autopsy, Santiago Nasar could not even have a proper burial, and they hurriedly put him in the ground.
ReplyDeleteBeside the autopsy, the Santiago’s corpse was already in bad shape. Though we don’t know how many stab wounds there were, the twins punctured him enough for the report to conclude: “it looked like a stigma of the crucified christ” (75). He had wounds on his hands, torso, and thighs. The twins’ motive was to restore their sisters honor by killing Santiago Nasar– so why did they dismantle his body? Why stab him several times? Though murder is already unethical, this questions just how far you need to go to take a life. It was said that “seven of the many wounds were fatal” (75), meaning that the Vicario brothers stabbed Santiago many times after he was already dead. Perhaps this is why they feel guilty later on, as seen from their inability to get Santiago’s “smell” off of them.
I completely agree with your analysis on the morals and ethics challenged throughout Chronicle of a Death Foretold. I wrote a post similar to yours about the ethics surrounding autopsies. You mentioned how the autopsy was done by a priest who was not qualified. The mention of many religious aspects is repeated throughout the novel which adds to the challenging of ethics, as ethics and morals are the driving force behind many faiths. One thing I noticed interesting was that the twins immediately confessed to the church their murder as they believed they were innocent. However, one of the Ten Commandments is that one shall not murder. The fact that murder is clearly unacceptable and that the twins still believed they were innocent seems very twisted.
DeleteFrustrating is the most accurate word possible to describe chapter 5 of Chronicle. Márquez, through the narrator, drags the reader through numerous retellings of the same forty eight hour period of time for seemingly no reason. There is no grand conclusion, no resolution to the conflict, just the series of excuses and coincidences that lead up to Nasar’s death. Traditional chronicles follow a series of events in chronological order, and usually contain some sort of resolution. This isn’t the case in Chronicle of a Death Foretold. It is this unusual structure that is one of the root causes of frustration for the reader. There must be a purpose to this, and some of the things revealed in chapter 5 may aid in discovering this. Perhaps the entire reason there is no conclusion is because the novel isn’t about a man being killed for a crime he may or may not have committed, but rather it is about how an entire town could collectively fail to alert one of its members of his impending death. This theory is most supported by Yamil Shaium. Yamil was the only person who actively attempted to alert Nasar of the threat to his life, “the only one who did what he had proposed… he preferred to consult first with Cristo Bedoya in case the latter was better informed” (Márquez 103). Yamil was a friend of the Nasar’s, both father and son, so he would ultimately be looking out for Santiago Nasar, but he somehow let Nasar continue walking away while he consulted with Cristo. I may just be ranting, but isn’t it much more logical to pull aside both Cristo and Santiago, this way Nasar is in less danger and can be alerted immediately in case he wasn’t already informed? This is just one of the lapses in judgement that lead to Nasar’s death, along with the countless other coincidences and excuses. Nasar being accused probably wasn’t preventable. However, his death is arguably so. This is probably why the reader becomes so angered and confused while reading the events unfold. Márquez could be saying multiple things through this though. On one end, he could be arguing that as much as we think life is predictable and situations can be under control, nothing is really controllable. On the other end, he could be saying that humans are ultimately pack animals. When they err, they err together.
ReplyDeleteI was with the majority of readers, frustrated by the conclusion of the novel as you say. Though it is indeed frustrating that the narrator never does discover who did take Angela Vicario's virginity or why the townspeople chose to let Santiago Nasar die, there is a grander purpose in the "chronicle" (that's not truly a chronicle). Due to the countless coincidences that lead to Santiago Nasar's murder and death, the author, Gabriel Garcia Marquez, aims to give the message that some things are simply unavoidable–fate. No matter the efforts of Yamil or Cristo, there was no other possible outcome to Santiago Nasar's day at that particular time. Some things are just fated to be, and Marquez chooses not to blame the townspeople in the novel because there truly was nothing they could do.
DeleteIn chapter 5, we are lead to believe that Santiago Nasar is in fact innocent, but none of the mysteries through the book are solved and the book concludes in an abrupt manner. The title of the book, “A Chronicle of a Death Foretold,” suggests that the story be told in chronological order, but the information revealed in each chapter jumps from time to time from varying sources. This comes from the idea that the chronicle is incomplete– something that the narrator notices in his investigation: “I searched many times with the water up to my ankles in that lagoon of lost causes, and after five years rummaging around only chance let me rescue some 322 pages filched from the more than 500 that the brief must have contained” (Marquez, 99). Here, the narrator doesn’t recover all the information that was involved in the case, resulting in his story to be incomplete. However, even through all of his interviews with people, he still never did discover who the culprit was that took Angela Vicario’s virginity. It is mentioned multiple times that Santiago was never seen with her, and that Angela could be protecting someone that really does love her. So then why does she return to Bayardo?
ReplyDeleteAnother important part of this chapter lies in this sentence: “Most of all, 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 ties into the magical realism– the magistrate never thought it could be possible that there would be so many coincidences to prevent people from intervening in the murder that was so clearly announced. The magical realism aspect is fate, and that nothing was able to prevent the death of Santiago Nasar– seen in his dream the night before.
I agree with what you said about the magical realism employed by the narrator when describing the magistrate's opinion of the events. No amount of coincidences could occur unless Nasar had some predetermined fate to die that morning. However, I have some criticism of your assumption that Angela was protecting someone who loved her. All we know is that she didn't want to reveal who really took her virginity. She could have been raped and been too ashamed to admit it. She went back to Bayardo because her mother was right, she learned to love him.
DeleteDuring chapter four of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, the narrator reveals some of the aftermath of Angela Vicario’s sending home, and specifically talks about the effects it had on Bayardo San-Roman. Marquez writes, “the only one who had lost everything was Bayardo San Roman: “poor Bayardo,” as he was remembered over the years” (Marquez 96). Bayardo, as the narrator explains, “lost everything.” Angela’s lack of virginity turned his world upside down; he lost the love of his life and his life in general. You know your life is bad when you are know as “poor (name).” The thing that makes it even worse is that none of it was in his control. He had no way of knowing that Angela was not a virgin, it was only societal norms that forced him to return her. Societal norms really rear their ugly head here, as they were, of course, the main cause of Santiago’s death and the towns shamefully apathetic cover-up. These horrific events caused Bayardo to attempt suicide by binge drinking during a sudden bout of depression. Marquez writes, “Bayardo San-Roman was unconscious on the bed… there were empty bottles on the floor and many more unopened beside the bed” (Marquez 97). This act is not entirely surprising after the events of the previous days, but this rash act seems to display something else in San-Roman: he leaps into decisions too quickly. This is supported by previous events in the book such as his courting and marriage of Angela. Instead of getting to know her over a period of time, he rushes in with his money and power, proposing and marrying quickly. It is possible that he would not have married Angela had he not been so hurried, thus preventing his eventual rejection of her and subsequent suicide attempt.
ReplyDeleteIn the final chapter of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez uses very brutal, graphic diction and visual imagery to, as vividly and accurately as possible, describe the murder of Santiago Nasar, a seemingly abrupt but fitting conclusion to the the novel. After all, it foreshadows the killing in the title, so it only makes sense to include it in the novel (although not necessarily at the end; being a famous author though, he can do what he wants). After the Vicario brothers manage to track Nasar down, Marquez writes, “Desperate, Pablo Vicario gave him a horizontal slash on the stomach, and all his intestines exploded out” (Marquez 141). This is possibly a case of too much information, but it gives great detail to the text nonetheless. In addition, it fits well with the rest of the novella, which features numerous instances of profane, grotesque, and vulgar diction. In a sense, these harsh words add a touch of realism that contrasts some of the confusing, blurred elements of magical realism that pepper this piece along with the unique, and at times unclear, plot. What seems very strange to me is that the narrator knows all of these facts. How would one be able to vividly describe a slaying, if they were not present and watching it for themselves? This contrast of realism and otherworldly powers make the narrator one of the most interesting, and probably the most mysterious, characters in the book, and this contrast is also one of the main points of intrigue for the story.
ReplyDeleteUtilizing revolting diction in Chapter 4 of A Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez displays how Santiago Nasar’s dignity and body has been defiled by his ordeal. Throughout the book Marquez hints using symbolism to employ that Santiago Nasar is innocent. Therefore by killing Santiago Nasar, they defiled his body, which was symbolized to be pure due to the white clothing he was wearing. During the autopsy, an inexperienced medical student and a pastor performed the autopsy of the body (The medical student actually alludes to the victim of a real story that the Chronicle of a Death Foretold is based on). As they perform the autopsy, due to the unsanitary conditions and lack of sufficient technology, on Santiago Nasar’s body “...a syrup-colored liquid began to flow from the wounds” (74). Using the words “syrup-colored” and “wounds” conjures a dominant effect of sympathy to imply that Nasar’s body is defiled. This also supports that Nasar was innocent since the reader feels bad for Nasar’s defiled body, they can safely assume that he was not the one who took Angela Vicario’s virginity. Or, if he did take her virginity, this description could be showing that Marquez believed that it was wrong to kill him though the ordeal was a matter of honor to the townspeople. He wants to make a statement that any reason for killing cannot justify such a horrendous action. Though his body was defiled the narrator still found his body “ a useful piece of evidence” to show that there was something of use that came out of the autopsy. Like a final attempt to prove his own innocence.
ReplyDeleteI am impressed by the conclusion you made, "a final attempt to prove his own innocence." I definitely had not considered something like that. It could play into the magical realism aspect of the story, and suggest that Nasar still lives on in the town. The stench throughout the town is another example of this. This is probably Marquez's way of showing that Nasar believed himself to be innocent of water crime he was accused of.
Delete
ReplyDeleteThe tragic loss of Santiago played a roll on not just the citizens, but the underlying theme of the story. Santi’s death was justified by the accusation of an affair with Angela, even though there was no evidence that Santi took Angela’s virginity. Which brings up the underlying question in the book, can any horrible action be justified through justice? Did Santiago Nasar deserve to die? And was it right of his killers to decide his fate, and take Justice into their own hands? As the reader progresses into the book, they find worse and worse things about santiago. We begin the story with the idea that Santiago was a respectable man who was loved by all, but then we find he is an alcoholic and wakes up with a hang over each monday, and he molested Divina, and as the rumor has it, took the virginity of his own sister. But do all these things stacked up justify his death? Can one really call judgement for Santi?
In the final chapter of A Chronicle of a Death Foretold, a detailed description of the event of Santiago Nasar’s stabbing is given at the end of the book. The way Nasar was killed alludes to the death of Jesus Christ. In a way, Nasar symbolized Christ throughout the story. The white clothes symbolizing his purity, his name often mentioned as two names and finally here in the last chapter, the way he was killed. In Jesus’s death on the cross, his palms, and feet were impaled by nails. Then after many hours, the guards that patrolled him stabbed him in his side to make sure he was dead. A similarity can be seen when the Vicario brothers first attacks Nasar “The knife went through the palm of his right hand and then sank into his side up to the hilt. Everybody heard his cry of pain” (117). This similarity is significant because it may be hinting at the innocence of Nasar and the guilt that should have been put on the Vicario brothers. Another similarity is made is that stabs that he received held him up “against the door” (119), which alludes to the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. The “crucifixion” of Santiago Nasar could symbolize a sacrifice, the sacrifice of his life for honor. It shows how Nasar’s had been a sacrifice, implying his innocence in taking the virginity of Angela Vicario. At the same time, Marquez denounces the killing for honor since the death of Christ had its benefits as well as it being a heinous crime. Marquez employs that honor should not be a justification for the killing by using such detailed description of the gruesome death.
ReplyDeleteI think this is a very unique and interesting analysis. I myself have never thought of this. I would like to contradict this with the fact that Santiago was the most un-christ like person. Have you considered that he could possibly be represented as satan? He seems to be more represented as satan as he was a drunk and he violated Divina, and to the belief of many, he took Angelas virginity.
Delete