“Victoria Guzman, for her part, had been categorical with her answer that neither she nor her daughter knew that the men were waiting for Santiago Nasar to kill him. But in the course of her years she admitted that both knew it when he came into the kitchen to have his coffee. They had been told it by a woman who had passed by after five o'clock to beg a bit of milk, and who in addition had revealed the motives and the place where they were waiting. ‘I didn't warn him because I thought it was drunkards' talk,’ she told me. Nevertheless, Divina Flor confessed to me on a later visit, after her mother had died, that the latter hadn't said anything to Santiago Nasar because in the depths of her heart she wanted them to kill him. She on the other hand, didn’t warn him because she was nothing but a frightened child at the time, incapable of a decision of her own, and she’d been all the more frightened when he grabbed her by the wrist with a hand that felt frozen and stony, like the hand of a dead man ” (1, 12-13).
Some common themes through both chapter one, and the article “Thirty-Eight Who Saw Murder Didn’t Call the Police”, are excuses, lies, and deceit. Both these characters admit to lying about their knowledge of the murder and gave a number of excuses as to why they did not warn Santiago of his death. This, very well, relates to the neighbours of Kitty Genovese in the case of her murder. In the article, we see a crazy amount of excuses that were given to the reporters. When asked why no one called the police until after the girl had been dead the witnesses said, “‘I didn’t want to get involved’”, “‘I don’t know’”, “‘I was tired…I went back to bed’”. These witnesses lack of action led to the death of an innocent girl, AND THIS IS ALL THEY HAVE TO SAY FOR THEMSELVES. The excuses given in both the book and the article show no form of guilt or sorrow from the witnesses. With all this in mind the author leaves the reader to question human nature. In New York the murder of Kitty became accepted as another iconic event symbolizing America’s collective loss of innocence and the beginning of a new, darker chapter of American history. Americans, especially those living in large cities like New York, had lost their moral footing, many decided, our civic values not what they once had been. In contrast, the death of Santiago, thus far in the book, seem to only have left an impact on his friends and family.
I agree with your analysis, however I think that the reason the people in New York did not want to get involve in the crime was because they were living in a rich neighborhood, meanwhile Kitty was living an apartment. This shows that these people did not get involved because she was a lower class citizen. This is similar to Victoria Guzman's story because she did not want to get involved in Santiago's murder because she hated the fact that he wanted to take her daughters virginity. All in all, no one wanted to intervene because it suited them personally.
It is clear how the perception of time is fundamental when understanding the novel. For instance, the narrator is “trying to put the broken mirror of memory back together from so many scattered shards”, which shows the kaleidoscopic image that will be reflected throughout the whole narration since he is actually putting events together after 27 years; the recreation of the happening will be distorted and never clear. This can be seen by the fact that people do not remember the weather of that sad Monday. On one hand, “many people coinceded in recalling that it was a radiant morning” (GM, 4), whereas others “agreed that the weather was funereal, with a cloudy low sky” (GM, 4). The fact that Garcia Marquez shows this contradiction is to reflect how deformed and unclear, at the end, the narrator's story will be, since he will never have a clear story or explanation to what happened to his friend, Santiago Nasar, 27 years after his death. Therefore, this brings to the idea of faith (which we have discussed in class after seeing the powerpoint), and how what happens may be put down to pure fate. This idea connects merely to Kitty Genovese’s crime in 1964:“It soon became clear that any number of neighbours had heard the woman’s scream or seen her attacker, and it became a widely accepted fact that no one had so much as telephoned the police”. (Reviving Kitty Genovese Case, And Its Passions). The fact that, in Brooklyn, the police department was not warned or advised about what was going on, is similar to the happenings in the events taking place in the village in the Caribbean shore: “ “I didn’t warn him because I thought it was drunkard talk” [Victoria Guzman] told me”. (Garcia Marquez, 13). However, in the novel, people actually knew what was going to happen to Santiago Nasar, and not only did not warn the police, but didn’t even warn Santiago himself, taking into account that the village was small and everybody knew each other. Nevertheless, it seems as if the police and Santiago Nasar, in both cases, were destined not to be warned, and that their death was unavoidable and inescapable.
Chapter two really shows the audience the severity of the lives women lead in the reserved Colombian culture of the town. Women did not really have the chance to make anything of themselves, instead their lives were bounded on all sides by tradition and the expectation to get married and have families. They did not go to school to learn things like math and science, instead they learned chores at home such as sewing, washing, and ironing. This is very well shown through Angela’s mother “‘They’re perfect’” (37), she’d say about her children. However, what she described as perfect was that the boys were brought up to be men and the women were brought up to be married. The idea that the woman in a marriage is expected to suffer and that no woman enters marriage expecting to be happy unless she is fortunate enough to love whichever man decides to court her is significant in this chapter. Angela repeatedly voiced the fact that she did not want to marry Bayardo San Roman but her family refuses to let her have her way and her mother even says, “‘Love can be learned too’” (35). This quote and idea is often highly debated and mainly looked at in arranged marriage, which is essentially the boat Angela is in. This idea is still looked at and pondered in culture today. In this Spanish culture, unlike Western culture, marriage is not based on love. when Bayardo San Román saw Angela and decided to marry her it was obviously not love that motivated this idea, it was her looks. A woman's worthiness as a wife was measured by her beauty in conjunction with her ability to gracefully run all aspects of a household. To win Angela’s love Bayardo wins a music box by buying every raffle ticket and then he gives the music box to her. This is a big deal because even something as simple as a gift can be a dangerous stain on a woman's reputation. It's immediately assumed that she's the one at fault for this odd act. strangely instead of love letters or long walks on the beach, material possessions are considered the sign of a romantic relationship and this is because it was considered attractive for men to be able to financially support the family; which Bayardo has clearly proven he can do. This passage shows how Angela’s views on love and marriage often differed from the society in which she lived because it is clear that she believes marriage should be based purely on love. Lastly, the main religion in Columbia is Catholicism and one of the main beliefs of catholics is the belief that people, especially women in this culture, should abstain from having sex before marriage. This is why Angela was immediately dropped by her day old husband because he came from a prestigious family and the idea of her being sexually before marriage was looked at as sloppy and very impure.
“my sister Margot had gone to the docks by walking along the shore, and the people were too excited with the bishop's visit to worry about any other news. They’d placed the sick people in the archways to receive God’s medicine, and women came running out of their yards with turkeys and suckilng pigs and all manner of things to eat…”(21) In this passage i realized that the bishop's visit to their town could symbolize the people of the towns distraction from the reality of their neighbors situation, and also the refusal to believe that there is an impending tragedy brewing. It was extremely evident in this chapter that there will be a recurring theme of miscommunication between characters and dramatic irony. Every person who knew about the murderous plot the two brothers had on Santiago, but everyone figured that another person would tell him therefor resulted in nobody telling him. Gabriel Garcia Marquez uses dramatic irony in order to create drama and miscommunications between characters, and also to explain the events following up to Santiago being murdered. It seems like everyone knows a different puzzle to the story that each reveals a key piece of the events following the murder. If only the characters would have all talked to each other they might have been able to put the pieces of the puzzle together and possibly save Santiago. This is the key to the story, and Gabriel Marquez does a very good job at slowly introducing the characters in a 1st person and investigation style. This investigator narration style really contributes to the themes of mystery and the feeling of confusion that this situation revolves around.
In A Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez misleads the readers with the title. A chronicle is a telling of a story in chronological order. However, he writes in a journalistic style that seems to have no particular order of events and interviews of people. This investigative journalistic narration emphasizes the motif of mystery. The story of this day is repeated throughout the chapters. There is no order to the story as the narrator is trying to learn the true events, “ I returned to this forgotten village, trying to put the broken mirror of memory back together” (Marquez 6). Marquez writes this “mystery” novel about a murder in a non-mysterious way. The reader is aware of the death before it occurs, similar to the characters within the novel. Rather than using literary techniques to foreshadow This allows the reader to understand the Kitty-Genovese syndrome the characters were going through. It is shown that all the characters discussed were aware of Santiago’s imminent death. However, no one made any attempt to stop the murder or tell Santiago of it, besides the mysterious note left under the door. Marquez often discusses the weather of the day, which seems irrelevant and rarely discusses the note left under the door which would be a huge clue in this murder, where the question is not who done it but rather, why did nobody stop it? In chapter one, this note is rarely mentioned in comparison to something as irrelevant as the weather.
In the novel Chronicle Of A Death Foretold written by Gabriel Marquez, is a journal of events about the life regarding a young man named Santiago Nasar. It is unclear however why Santiago is killed and the situation is portrayed by vague facts that don’t appear to be relevant to a reason why. Marquez includes facts such as, “he was always dreaming about trees” (Marquez 3). It has not been explained what significance trees have in the novel except the fact his mother had said, when you dream about trees, something good will happen. The only thing that happened however was his death, and I do not see why his mother would view this as a positive thing. His mood was also included as being, “An hour later remembered him as being a little sleepy but in a good mood, and he remarked to all of them it was a beautiful day Marquez 4). neither of these facts have any relevance as to why he was then killed later on in the book. The interviews don’t seem to be in any relevant order or a=contain any relevant facts. This can be seen as a way to inspire desire in the reader to put these facts together almost as a murder mystery to keep them reading. Letting the reader put the facts together and in order in the end as more of an interactive way to interest the reader.
When describing the setting of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez uses a plethora of imagery, including kinesthetic, olfactory, and visual. By doing so, Marquez immerses the reader more fully into the story and allows them to become deeply invested in it. The story takes place in a small town located in the Caribbean region, which is a mainly tropical area. A possible symbol that I noticed was the choice of biome. In tropical regions, the weather can vary greatly and is able to change in an instant, rarely staying the same for a long period of time. I feel like the inconsistency of the weather goes hand in hand with the views of the other characters of the book, as many statements made by some characters seem to differ greatly with others and almost seem to butt heads. The fact that the town is characterized to be small is also of great significance, as Santiago’s death could’ve likely been better prevented in an area of higher population and monitoring.
Yes, the setting of the novel (Columbia) to be exact I believe, does create a tone of simplicity, and as you mentioned can parallel with the story's theme of constant change, and uncertainty. The tropical region being somewhat secluded and with uncertain weather helps the reader enter a setting of relaxation but also a sense of fear simultaneously. I like what you said about the small town possibly signifies how the death was that much more stoppable, or preventable due to more people knowing of the information of the town, as well as it's people, also making it more shocking that nobody would stand up for a person they would all apparently know fairly well. Overall instructing analysis, I actually got a lot out of that, I had never thought too much into the setting because, the setting was based off a true story I assumed, so I never considered it a part of the author's craft.
In chapter 2, Garcia Marquez fully introduces the fundamental character of Bayardo San Roman, in order to slowly put together the shattered pieces of Santiago Nasar's murder. Now, the author has given the reader a more cultural and contextual insight of the motive of this murder, by describing that aspects of a traditional colombian life. For instance, gender role is a predominant feature in this novel, and is clearly seen in chapter 2, when GM describes how Angela Vicario and her sisters were reared to get married. By doing so, the writer bends the rules of a first person narrator, since it also acts as a third-person omniscient, knowing what the characters are feeling. This, consequently, provides the reader with a deeper insight of the typical traditions and customs of colombia, as well as the behavior of the society towards it. The fact that the narrator knows how Angela and her sister had “grown up under the rigor of a mother iron” (GM, 37), offers the reader a broader understanding of the familiar situation in the Vicario’s household. Angela was “raised to suffer” (GM, 31) in order to fit perfectly in the society’s housewife standards. To the Vicario’s the fact that Angela was being offered to marry a wealthy and prestigious man meant bringing honor to the family, as well as fortune. It is clear, therefore, how gender roles contribute to the image of Family Honor, which, as we have seen, is something Angela nor Santiago complies to, which leads to the tragic ending.
“... he was alone in a tinfoil airplane and flying through the almond trees without bumping into anything” (M. 3-4).
In the beginning chapter of Gabriel Garcia Marquez’s Chronicle of a Death Foretold, he uses foreshadow and contrasting descriptions of the weather to tell the audience Nasar’s impending death. The quote above mention one of Santiago’s dream about trees, and oftentimes dreams foreshadow bad things that are going to happen. In his dream, he is passing through a wood of almond trees with ease. Santiago felt happy and content, but it was short lived because he woke up feeling as if he was splattered in bird poop. As the story progresses we learn that Pablo and Pedro Vicario, who are identical twins, had publicly announced that they’re planning on killing Santiago. As a result, many people knew about Santiago’s impending death, but not one person tried to put an end nor tried to warned Santiago of the Vicario brothers’ plan. So we can conclude that the trees, in this case, represents people that Santiago met but did not inform him. The bird poop symbolizes his coming death. Some people that saw him on the day that he died recalled that “it was a radiant morning with a sea breeze” (Marquez 4). But to a few others, they disagreed and remembered the weather was “funereal, with a cloudy, low sky” (Marquez 4). The contrast between these two descriptions of the weather most likely represents people’s thoughts and feelings towards Santiago’s death. People who recalled the weather being radiant with a sea breeze, probably was (somewhat) happy to learn that he was going to die. Whereas those who recalled the morning to be funereal and gloomy, most likely knew that the brothers are wrong and that Santiago’s life will have an unfortunate ending, but there is nothing that they could have done.
Wow great analysis! I like how you mentioned the fact that the dream had played into his death. When I had first read the book, I hadn't noticed that but after reading it a second time I have. His dream shows exactly how he died, He is happy just like he is in his dream. Then all the sudden he dies and I think him dying symbolizes the bird poop. I also feel like his mother had a role in the foreshadowing of his death through this passage. For example, his mother says that the dream doesn’t mean anything bad and that it will be ok. This is exactly how everyone the Vicario twins told about them planning to Santiago reacted. They hadn’t done anything and had assumed the wrong message by assuming that they were just drunk and not going to actually do it.
In chapter two Gabriel Garcia Marquez really shows the social hierarchies of the time. Rich powerful men could effortlessly rule over anyone else without question. The powerful man oppressing every other character in the book is Bayardo San Roman. He showed up in their town along with a plethora of fairy tales and rumors about his life and origins. It turns out that almost none of these rumors are true, but that does not stop Bayardo San Roman from using these misconceptions about him, along with his suave charm, in order to get what he wants. He first uses his charm to win over the Vicario family in order to marry their most beautiful and youngest daughter Angela Vicario. But he had not used his charm to win over his soon to be wife, he saw that unnecessary, instead he used his charm to win over her family rendering Angela powerless against her opposition. “It was Angela Vicario who didn’t want to marry him. “he seemed too much of a man for me,” she told me. Besides Bayardo San Roman hadn’t even tried to win court her, but he had bewitched the family with his charm.” (pg 34) Angela Vicario was completely defenseless against Beyardo’s power. She was forced to marry him, and when she protested to her own mother about how she cannot have a marriage without love, her mom said “love can be learned too”. This would be insanity in today's society, no man has that much power over people. That is how much times have changed in the past 80 years.
In the second chapter of the book, it appears to bring up the topic of predetermined and gender roles among men and women in the Latin American culture. Poncio Vicario and Purisima del Carmen are Angela and the twin brothers’ parents. The parents raised the twins as men, “the brothers were brought up to be men” (M. 31), whereas “girls had been reared to get married” (M. 31). Boys are brought up to be men, and there's not much to say about it because it's simple as that. On the other hand, girls have a “sacred duty”.” From birth, they are nurtured to get married. Some examples of things that girls will know how to do are “screen embroidery, sew by machines, weave bone lace, wash and iron, and make artificial flowers” (M. 31). All of these examples are housework. At the time, like many other women in different countries, Latin American women had to fulfill their predetermined roles. Which is to be an obedient wife, loving mother, and be diligent with house work. Women in Latin American culture today do still have the role of being a steady housekeeper, but the rate of women in the working classes have greatly increased, and it does not seem to be slowing down in the near future. On the same page, Marquez writes “there were no better-reared daughters,” and “... because they've been raised to suffer.” This makes me cringe and kind of disturbed because it clearly seems that women were treated like animals and an object. Marquez wrote that women were “raised to suffer,” which we can conclude that a woman’s worthiness as a wife was judged by how great and diligent she was at keeping her house together. If women were raised to suffer, then I wonder what most women thought about marriage. Are they happy to get married? Excited? Pleased? Women must have entered into a marriage without expecting much, unless she is fortunate enough to have a loving and caring husband.
I thought your analysis of this was very interesting. Seeing as Angela was not the perfectly reared daughter and she was found out and rejected. This was Marquez making commentary on the role of women and how those who strayed from societal norms were punished. And those involved, or supposedly involved, would be felt with severely; Santiago. I also thought it was interesting that it was assumed to then be the woman's fault for having an affair before marriage because she made it out to that she had no choice in the matter. Also, I found it interesting that the after was blind and Angela never did say who was her perpetrator and that she, "was protecting someone who really loved her”(104). I noticed how this slightly parallels with the myth of Oedipus and how he blinded himself after sleeping with someone he shouldn't have. Also and that he died shortly after because of, “his moral pain” that had, “carried him off”(96). This was reported by Angela showing how her father could not live with the unjust act he had committed and then condemned another to what should have been his fate.
“Maria Alejandrina Cervantes had left the door open of her house unbarred. I took leave of my brother, crossed the veranda where the mulatto girls' cats were sleeping curled up among the tulips, and opened the bedroom door without knocking. The lights were out, but as soon as I went in I caught the smell of a warm woman and I saw the eyes of an insomniac leopard in the darkness, and then I didn’t know anything else about myself until the bells began to ring” (68).
This quote in chapter 3 was very interesting to me and took me a little to understand so I just felt like breaking it down in a blog post. In this quote Marquez uses symbolism, imagery, and slang to promote the theme of love vs lust. Let’s break this down piece by piece. The first important image is the veranda, the veranda symbolizes how Santiago is on his way to creating his goals, which is essentially bedding Maria.Verandas can also indicate a lackadaisical approach to life, enjoying the finer things in life, and appreciating those around you. The finer things being sex, and he is appreciating Maria. The lackadaisical approach suggest that sex is something of no greater importance than for fun and pleasure, which frankly is what it is to Maria and Santiago. Though Santiago truly loves Maria, lust gets in his way. “where the mulatto girls’ cats were sleeping curled up among the tulips” this line is talking about how lust affects true emotion. First things first, there is slang that the reader must understand, the word mulatto. Mulatto simply means a person of mixed white and black ancestry. Next, we look at the significance of both the cats, and tulips. Tulips symbolize perfect love while, in this case, cats symbolize lust. The imagery of the cat being curled up around tulips shows that the cat is guarding, or blocking, the tulips. or in other words lust blocks love. Next we see the term “warm women” and this slang is generally referring to a sexually playmate or a whore. He then states “ I saw the eyes of an insomniac leopard” leopards symbolize sensuality and physical strength and in this case the leopard symbolizes Santiago looking at himself and seeing nothing more than a strong sensual, hunter. The insomniac eyes remind him that lust is always flourishing in the night. The bells ringing symbolize the fact that lust had completely taken over his senses. So putting all that information together the general idea of this quote is that Santiago is sleeping with Maria, but in depth the quote is saying that sex can be purely out of love or lust, and in this case they choose lust, which can only block them from having a serious relationship.
Garcia Marquez’s unique style and narrations presents the unalterable theme of time. It is clear how the tragic death of Santiago Nasar was preventable, and the fact that the townspeople knew about it and did not warn him makes it even more disastrous. The author makes it seem that there was nothing to be done against the dignity and will of the Vicario brothers in order to stop them, which makes it seem as if Nasar’s was destined to die that Monday morning. In chapter 3, the theme of time and the presence of an unstoppable will is seen in the fact that many of the characters ‘break’ their traditional working hours and time. For instance, this can be seen when the Vicario’s brother come in to the butcher’s shop on a Monday morning instead of a Friday, to sharpen and file their knives: “he was accustomed to see them on Fridays, but a little later, and wearing the leather apron they use for slaughtering.” (GM, 51). The fact that Pablo and Pedro are sharpening the knife at an unusual day and time then what is normally expected must have brought up certain doubts and suspicion of the butcher guy, although he did nothing about it. Another example can be seen in Clotilde Armenta’s shop, which she would normally “open at three-thirty in the morning”, where her husband “went to bed at three o’clock without closing” which made Clotilde Armenta wake “up earlier than usual”. (GM, 53) The fact that she woke up earlier because her husband had not closed the shop after his shift, and presenced the Vicario’s brothers at her shop is also a breakthrough the normal, habitual schedule. She, therefore, heard the Vicario brothers plan and tried to prevent them from carrying it out. If Clotilde had closed her shop at three-thirty as usual, the Pedro and Pablo Vicario would have not been able to stop by. If we actually break the Vicario’s trajectory up to Santiago’s death, preventing the change in schedules in Clotilde’s shop and their own butcher case, could Santiago Nasar’s death been prevented? This comes back to Garcia Marquez’s main theme of destiny, how there is no escaping from it, and the fact that honor gets its way back.
In chapter three of A Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez utilizes visual imagery and characterizes Bayardo San Roman to demonstrate the social hierarchy and gender roles during this time in this Latin culture. Bayardo San Roman, the husband of the returned wife, was introduced and discussed within this chapter. He was a rich man in search of a wife and was aware of his ability to win people over with his charm and attain objects with his wealth. When originally introduced, Marquez uses visual imagery to describe his appearance and display his high position in society as a wealthy male. The narrator describes him, “he had the waist of a bullfighter, golden eyes, and a skin slowly roasted by a saltpeter” (Marquez 25). A saltpeter is a type of mineral that helps increase the time where you can use meat. Having skin roasted by saltpeter is displaying how San Roman is able to live a long happy life due to his excessive wealth keeping him fresh with new materialistic things. By describing him with golden eyes, the narrator is demonstrating the high position of San Roman in the social world and talking about his wealth. The narrator also describes how his wealth caused others to fear him, “his golden eyes had caused the shudder of fear in her (28). Women who he viewed as possible wives were unhappy with his power because it caused fear within them. Men had the majority of the power within this era, also wealth improved social standing. Women were forced into marriages by the family in order to gain financial or social standing. Not wanting to marry San Roman, her mother told her that, “Love can be learned too” (35). Her own mother didn’t change her mind based on her daughter’s unhappiness but rather said her daughter can make an adjustment in order to help the family. Women were seen as an item used to help improve a family’s level in society, however they remain powerless in decisions. A wealthy man brought fear into women, without having spoken or having had an altercation, demonstrating the massive power men had over women during this time in Latin culture.
In chapter three of A Chronicle of A Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez creates a motif of honor involving the twin brothers. They both claim innocence based on the idea that they did it in order to protect their sister’s honor. The twins believed that fighting to protect honor justified the atrocity they committed. Their belief in that justification was so strong that they told many people around the town about their plan, who in return laughed it off. In the trial the twins used that justification to their advantage, “the lawyer stood by the thesis of homicide in legitimate defense of honor” (Marquez 48). This idea of honor is that the brothers aimed to kill the man who took their sister’s virginity and in their eyes, ruined her marriage. This idea of protecting your family’s honor is not outrageous however in today’s society it is obviously frowned upon to murder someone in order to do so. The view of protecting honor during this era and location is unclear due to the fact that quickly following the arrest, the twin’s family flees the area, most likely avoiding conflict and drama involving the murder and also their daughter. Pablo’s fiance was totally in love with the idea of her future husband defending a woman's honor as she saw that admirable and promised to marry him the second he was released from jail after committing this heinous crime. Prudencia’s mother saw them as they were on their way to murder Santiago. The twins told her they were in a rush, and without having to tell her of their future actions, she responded, “ Honor doesn’t wait” (62). Marquez makes it apparent that the overall view on honor was not solidified between the whole community. When telling the townspeople about the plotted murder, many laughed it off believing it to be a joke even the authorities did not take the threat seriously. Did they truly not take it seriously or possibly let it continue because they believed protecting honor was right?
In chapter two of the Novel Chronicle Of A Death Foretold, Gabriel Marquez reveals a theme of gender inequality through what a man and a woman are expected to do for their families This can be seen when the author is talking about Angela’s father and says, “ Her father, Poncio Vicario, was a poor man’s goldsmith, and he’d lost his sight from doing so much fine work in gold in order to maintain the honor of the house” (Marquez 30). This quote portrays the hardship that a man had in this time era to maintain the reputation of his family. He father was pressed to work so hard that he had ended up losing his sight. This shows the extent men were supposed to live up to in this time period as well and how much stereotypes played into people’s lives. woman were treated in the sense that they were supposed to please their man and take care of the household. This can be seen when Marquez says, “ She devoted herself with such spirit of sacrifice to the care of her husband and the rearing of her children that at times one forgot she still existed (Marquez 31). This quote shows how women were treated unequally when it came to family matters as well. Angela’s mother devoted so much of her life to taking care of her children and husband, that they often forgot about her because she was constantly doing household chores. It can be seen that women were taken for granted in this time but they were doing what was expected of them.
In chapter three of the novel Chronicle Of A Death Foretold, Gabriel Marquez reveals a theme of how family honor can persuade people to do what they need to in order to preserve it. This can be seen when the author sets up the scene of Angela’s brothers finding out and says, “ After their sister revealed the name to them, the Vicario twins went to the bin in the pigsty where they kept their sacrificial tools…” (Marquez 50). This quote shows how outraged the brothers were to find out who had taken the virginity of their sister. They felt this so unfair that they felt they had to take matters into their own hands. It shows the dedication and love they have for their sister that they are willing to do anything in her honor. However it also shows what dark depths people are willing to go to in order to protect their families honor in this time. throughout this entire chapter, it is talked about how these brothers were good and how no one believed them when they said they were going t kill Santiago. One man had even said, “ I thought they were so drunk” (Marquez 51). This shows that since everyone thought they were good kids, that when they had told them of their plan, they had shrugged it off and thought they were just drunk. If two good brothers could snap to the extent that they would murder a man in the name of honor, it shows how important honor was in this time.
“Angela Vicario only dared hint at the inconvenience of a lack of love, but her mother demolished it with a single phrase: ‘Love can be learned too.’” (Marquez)
In chapter two, we learn that Angela Vicario does not want to marry Bayardo San Roman. After hinting at her lack of desire for this, Angela’s mother states “love can be learned too”. This statement was quite ironic in my opinion, as love is not something that you learn, but rather experience. Love is not something that can simply be taught in a classroom, it is something that one must seek out for themselves and discover on their own. By writing this, Marquez is further developing the setting as well, as it is now quite clear that the story takes place in a culture where love and marriage are more of an investment and less of a life choice. Also, it should be noted that this small chunk of dialogue by Angela’s mother also demonstrates the role of women in the town, as marriage seems to be an essential part of life for them, even if it is forced. The real event that the story is based off of was in 1951, so this ideal that women need to be married to make it or be successful in life is not too surprising. The 50’s was still very much a time of women being treated as inferior to males, and I feel like the text somewhat reflects that.
"'We're going to kill Santiago Nasar,' he said. Their reputation as good people was so well-founded that no one paid any attention to them. 'We thought it was drunkards' baloney,' several butchers declared, just as Victoria Guzman and so many others did who saw them later." (Marquez Chapter 3)
The way that the brothers practically walk around telling everybody that they are going to kill Santiago and still don’t face any resistance gives this story an almost gloomy, depressing feeling for me. It’s somewhat of a tragedy how, despite everyone being well aware of the brothers’ intentions, Santiago still meets his doom. The excerpt that I took out of this chapter helps to demonstrate the theme that I feel the book expresses. In Chronicle of a Death Foretold, a theme that conveys the importance of bystanders is shown. Almost everyone that the brothers come in contact with have an opportunity to stop them, yet they don’t, which is arguably ultimately the reason for Santiago Nasar’s demise. This exemplifies how, in some scenarios, it can all come down to the actions of the bystanders. Even someone with as little of a role as sharpening knifes can be the deciding factor of a make-or-break scenario.
In chapter four of A Chronicle of A Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez displays a possible feeling of guilt by the Vicario twins. However, the townspeople do not seem to be mourning the loss of Santiago. The autopsy is barely legal and may possibly hold incomplete information as it was completed by a priest. The mayor had required this autopsy to be performed by the priest, “even the mayor knew that his autopsy would have no legal standing. Nevertheless, he made him carry out the order” (Marquez 74). Not only does this display the possible innaccruary of the autopsy but rather it demonstrates the lack of love or sympathy for Santiago Nasar and his family. The mayor doesn’t even allow a legitimate autopsy. The process of this autopsy also shows a lack of sympathy towards Santiago and possible living relatives, who are not named. The priest rudely disposed of Nasar’s body, “the priest had pulled out the sliced-up intestines by the roots, but in the end he didn’t know what to do with them, and he gave them an angry blessing and threw them into the garbage pail” (76). The priest gave his intestines an angry blessing, demonstrating his possible dislike for Santiago. Later, he then dumps them in the trash can. After displaying the lack of sympathy the townspeople are feeling, Marquez then hints at guilt felt by the Vicario brothers within jail. The Vicario brothers were uncomfortable with themselves in prison, “they’d gone three nights without sleep, but they couldn’t rest because as soon as the began to fall asleep they would commit the crime all over again” (78). Although they claimed they would repeat their actions that protected the honor of their sister, the twins seem to have an unconscious guilt. Their inability to sleep is caused by their brain’s constant thinking about the crime. Even though they seem to be okay with it, they still will be unable to erase that from their memory. And that memory could forever harm their brain.
Oh my goodness this analysis! This opens a new light in understanding the psychological meaning behind the bystanders. For example, maybe they thought negatively of Santiago because he has done things in the past that may have angered them. Of course this is not valid in the text, as it gives no textual evidence, but this could maybe symbol (along with the religious views) the reason why people never really interacted with Nasar to prevent his murder.
“Thus, right at the start of the Bible, the number 7 is identified with something being “finished” or “complete.” From then on, that association continues, as 7 is often found in contexts involving completeness or divine perfection. So we see the command for animals to be at least seven days old before being used for sacrifice (Exodus 22:30), the command for leprous Naaman to bathe in the Jordan River seven times to effect complete cleansing (2 Kings 5:10), and the command for Joshua to march around Jericho for seven days (and on the seventh day to make seven circuits) and for seven priests blow seven trumpets outside the city walls (Joshua 6:3–4). In these instances, 7 signifies a completion of some kind: a divine mandate is fulfilled.” In chapter 4 of Chronicles of a Death Foretold, the narrator begins describing the autopsy and “massacre” that the Doctors and authorities performed on Santiago Nasar’s corpse. This procedure was a disastrous and unbearable, as seen through the author’s thorough description and details of the happening, in which all the townspeople were present during the ceremony. In this description, the narrator makes reference to the fact that “Seven of the many wounds were fatal”. (GM, 75). Culturally, these people were highly catholic practitioners, and religion was a fundamental basis in their society. Therefore, taking this into account, we can consider the number 7 as a holy and sacred number in catholicism, showing the author’s use of craft. “Right at the start of the Bible, the number 7 is identified with something being “finished” or “complete.” We can assimilate this with the situation present in Chronicles of a Death Foretold, since the killing of Santiago Nasar by the Vicario brothers was a duty and a commitment they had to carry out. The fact that they left 7 deadly wounds shows the ‘finishing’ or completing of this task.
In chapter five of A Chronicle of A Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez first describes the actual murder that had occurred rather than other events either prior or following the murder. By the final chapter, the reader is finally able to question Santiago Nasar’s innocence as the narrator mentions that he is clueless as to why he is dying. It is mentioned in chapter four, that Angela Vicario’s accusation may not be completely truthful. As the timing just would have been near impossible to work out without anyone having a clue. On the morning of his impending death, Santiago Nasar goes to visit his fiance who is humiliated by the news of Santiago taking another girl’s virginity. Clueless about what is going on, his fiance’s father sheds light on the fact that there is a plot to murder him, to which he replied, “I don’t understand a God-damned thing” (Marquez 114). Santiago expresses his confusion leading the reader and possibly bystanders to question his participation in this alleged accusation. The townspeople show no sympathy to Santiago as no one tells him of his death. But rather, the townspeople had been ready to watch, “the people had stationed themselves on the square the way they did on parade days” (115). Parades are used as a form of celebration, Marquez describes the setup similar to a parade to display to the reader the lack of sympathy the people felt toward Santiago. Rather than look at his possible innocence, they line up to watch his murder take place, as if it is entertainment to all of them. Even when questioning Angela Vicario she could never come up with the story of when this went down, but rather all she does is describe Santiago, “he was my perpetrator” (100). Unable to give details about the event that caused someone their life would hopefully raise some doubt within people.
The love letters that Angela Vicario send to Bayardo hold great significance in chapter 4. Traditionally, the function of love letters are to express one’s true love, or longing, for their partner. The physical letter shows its receiver the thought and hard work the giver put into making it but the context of the letter is what shows the true emotion and passion the giver feels about the receiver. However, in the book, Bayardo does not value Angela’s love letters for their content. Just the act of her sending the letters gives him the confidence the she is in love with him and wants him to return to her. Angela’s obsessive letter writing fits under the theme of rituals in this book because the letters symbolize the ritualistic nature of romantic love in their society. The actual contents of her letters is not important—just the fact that she sends them and he receives them is all that matters. They seem to relate to each other according to conventional rules of romance. First through gifts from Bayardo to Angela, and next through love letters from Angela to Bayardo. The fact that Angela Vicario didn't know what to write, and that Bayardo didn't care to read or know what she had written, highlights the importance of the ritual of writing and receiving letters as opposed to the importance of the content. His lack of interest in the content seems to contrast with the purpose of writing letters, similar to the novel's overall disinterest in the truth surrounding the murder. It also shows us that the concepts of love in Colombia are firmly rooted in the actions between two lovers, as opposed to the understanding between them.
In chapter four the guilt and regret of the town becomes evident. This is shown through quotes that the townspeople later say. Everyone felt horrible about the crime, and most of the time people were even sickened about it. “...Colonel Lazaro Aponte, who had seen and caused so many repressive massacres, became a vegetarian as well as a spiritualist.” (76) Even someone who had killed so many and had seen so many other people killed could not stomach this brutal murder. Before the murder occurred almost no one intervened, because it was a matter of honor, but after the incident everyone dropped the fact that it was a “matter of honor” and mourned Santiago Nasar's death. Some people even questioned the fact that the death was even justified by honor. It is debatable whether or not Santiago Nasar is even guilty of taking Angela Vicario’s virginity, the whole reason the Vicario twins killed him in the first place. Santiago is even compared to Jesus Christ. “He had a deep stab in the right hand. The report says: ‘It looked like a stigma of the crucified Christ.”(75) This is the perfect person to allude Santiago Nasar to. Jesus was killed by people who claimed to be justified in his killing, while he was still innocent. Santiago was extremely oblivious to his inevitable death, and if he was actually guilty of taking Angela Vicario’s honor wouldn't he have been extremely conscious of the Vicario twins impending revenge for his actions. I believe that he is innocent, and that the rest of the town knows this. That is why they are all so sad and feeling so guilty after his death, but it is really convenient to hide behind the fact that the murder was justified as a matter of “honor”.
As the narrator recounts the murder, I found it interesting that amidst the flurry of the murder, many people’s senses became distorted. Victoria Guzman told Placida Linero that she saw “Satiago Nasar come in through the door on the square and go up the open stairs to the bedrooms…he was wearing his white suit and carrying something that I couldn’t make out well in his hand” (116). If Nasar had not entered the house, where did the sight of Nasar come from? Was she imagining him? Or was she merely just lying to Placida Linero? This goes back to the authenticity of the evidence that the narrator collected about the murder. To what extent are the accounts accurate and truthful? As for Placida Linero, she heard “she heard Santiago Nasar’s shouts, and she heard the terrified pounding on the door, but she thought he was upstairs, insulting the Vicario brothers from the balcony in his room”. (117) I found it hard to understand the turn of events. If Nasar was just outside the door, how could she mistake her son to be upstairs on the balcony? Couldn’t she hear her son from the other side of the door?
Your point about senses being distorted stuck out to me. When people’s minds go into panic mode, they can often end up with memories that are skewed or sometimes even completely falsified. I thought it was interesting how the result of this was also seen in the debate over the weather conditions of that day, as there were many conflicting statements regarding it. Trauma can have an enormous effect on memory, and I feel like this is seen many times in the story. It could even be possible that the minds of the townsfolk put Santiago in a position of likely being innocent because of witnessing his death with their own eyes, as it was stated in the book that, in the end, many people didn’t truly believe he did it.
The recurring theme of chaos in the town is extremely evident in chapter 5. One of the symbols that contributes to the chaos of the town is the Bishop's arrival. Every single person in the entire town will be flocking to see the Bishop speak, even though that it is extremely evident that he does not care about the town. It seemed that every single person knew about Santiago Nasar’s inevitable death except for him. One of the many reasons for this was that every person in the town was preoccupied by the arrival of the bishop that they had not thought of telling Santiago Nasar. This is still unlikely because it seemed like his death was all that everyone was talking about even before his death. His death was so foretold that some people even thought he had died before he actually did. The reason for his death seemed to be justified. The Vicario brothers were taking their sister Angela’s honor back. It is unsure whether or not Santiago Nasar actually slept with Angela Vicario. “...not even the most improbable that Santiago Nasar had been the cause of the wrong. The friends of Angela Vicario who had been her accomplices in the deception went on saying for a long time that she had shared her secret with them before the wedding, but that she hadn’t revealed any name.” (99-100) This has some serious implications for the Vicario brothers, Angela and even the entire town. The moral implications of this are horrendous. An entire town knew about a murder, but did not get involved because it was a matter of honor which turned out to be untrue.
Chaos is for sure a major piece of the story, however, although I’m not disagreeing with you, I’d like to say that I personally believe that guilt is a more prominent reoccurrence in the story. For example, it could be said that the townsfolk don’t interfere because they would feel guilty for denying someone’s attempts to restore honor, as honor seems to be almost sacred within the town. However, despite not interfering, they still end up feeling guilty that they did not intervene and prevent the death of a man who has not yet been proven guilty/innocent. Some people even feel so guilty that they themselves start to suffer.
In chapter 4 of Chronicle Of A Death Foretold, remorse can be seen through the way the town portrays how brutal the murder of Santiago was and the effect that it had left on certain characters in the book. This can be seen when Santiago’s body is given and autopsy and the priest says, “ It was as if we killed him all over again after he was dead” (Marquez 72). Santiago was already brutally murdered by the Vicario twins and it had made matter worse that they had to autopsy the body. It was already so disfigured, they felt it was inhuman to disfigure it anymore, even though it was in a humane sense. it shows how he had felt bad to to make any further changes to his body since he had been murdered for a reason that hasn’t been proven yet. The death hadn’t only played a toll on those who had to make the autopsy on Santiago, it had also affected the Vicario twins who had killed Santiago. This can be seen when Pedro Vicario says, “ No matter how much I scrubbed with soap and rags, I couldn't get rid of the smell. This shows two things, both literally and metaphorically. He feels as if he couldn’t get the smell off of him, which is probably true. However, it also shows that no matter what he did, he will never be able to move past the fact that he had murdered a man. No matter what he does, he will always live with the guilt of him taking the life of someone else. It also shows the effect that the murder had on him even though he thought that he was doing the right thing by protecting his sister and family honor.
In the beginning of chapter 4, Marquez mainly writes about Santiago Nasar’s body and of his autopsy that was performed by the priest, Father Carmen Amador (the town physician was absent). Nasar’s corpse can be compared to that of a butchered animal. The dogs, “aroused by the smell of death” (M. 73), wants to eat his guts. This makes sense because dogs cannot differentiate a rabbit’s guts and that of a human being. Fortunately, the dogs were locked up in a stable, and were later taken to a place far away. But Nasar’s luck ended there, as his autopsy went wrong on so many levels. Even the priest, who was in charge of performing the autopsy, said “It was as if we killed him all over again after he was dead” (M. 72). The post-mortem examination went so awry, when they returned Nasar’s corpse it did not look like him at all, “They gave us back a completely different body” (M. 76). Lastly, to make things worse, the guts that the dogs wanted to eat so badly were thrown into a garbage pail. The representation of Nasar as a sacrificial animal, is a symbol of Santiago Nasar being sacrificed for the sins of his community. The community committed a sin by knowing Santiago’s impending death, but could not be bothered to prevent it.
I agree with your analysis of the autopsy and never thought of Santiago Nasar’s corpse as being a symbol! Also, I believe the almost invalid autopsy demonstrates the disrespect towards Santiago expressed by the townspeople. Santiago was not even given the right of legitimate autopsy. The mayor ordered the priest to do it anyways. Even the disposal of his body parts was incorrect, he gave them an angry blessing and threw them into the garbage pail” (76). The discussion on the guts also demonstrates the magical realism Marquez utilizes in order to add graphics to the discussion of the murder and body itself.
In chapter five the magical realism aspect of the book really emphasizes the fact that Santiago Nasar is innocent. For example when Pedro Vicario was talking to the investigator about killing Santiago he declared, “‘The strange thing is that the knife kept coming out clean’, ‘I’d given it to him at least three times and there wasn’t a drop of blood’” (117-118). The event is an implication that Santiago was not supposed to die. Also, the fact that he walked around his house while carrying his intestines again reitterates this message through magical realism. Magical realism is used yet again to portray Santiago as a figure of Christ when the narrator writes “The knife went through the palm of his right hand” (117). This is a parallel to Jesus’ crucifixion in that he was nailed through the palms. The walk that Santiago endures to the backside of his house while holding his intestines also parallels Jesus' walk to Mt. Sinai while carrying the cross. Jesus dies due to the sins of others and so does Santiago, both are innocent, but both die. Symbolism also emphasizes Santiago’s innocence. Davina Flor tells the narrator, “‘He was wearing his white suit and carrying something that I couldn’t make out well in his hand, but it looked like a bouquet of roses’” (116). “He” is referring to Santiago on the day of his death. He is wearing a white suit which is significant because white symbolizes purity, virginity, and innocence. Which is almost ironic because Santiago is far from pure and definitely not a virgin however, in this case, he is innocent. Also red roses symbolize sacrifice which again alludes to the similarities of Jesus and Santiago because Jesus sacrificed himself for our sins.
I agree with the analysis and the point you make, on how the craft of magic realism and symbolism used by the author reflects Santiago's true innocence in the Vicario brother's claim. However, as we have read in the book, the author describes Santiago's death as an act of faith and destiny, and that it was undoubtedly inevitable. Although you state that he was innocent and that Marquez shows that he was not to blame, do you think that his death was the cause of another crime/unmoral action?
In the final chapter of Chronicle Of A Death Foretold, even though the people of the town had felt remorse and the death was the only thing they could talk about, they had down nothing to stop the revenge. This can be seen when the narrator says, “ But most of those who could have done something to prevent the crime and did not consoled themselves with the pretext that affairs of honor are sacred monopolies…” (Marquez 97). In this quote shows that those who could have done something to prevent Santiago’s murder hadn’t done so. They believed that this was a sacred honor to be don by the boys. In previous chapter, they had used excuses such as they were nice bos and they could have never done anything like this, as well as the excuse of people thinking they had just been drunk. It can be seen that no one does anything to intervene because they thought as if it needed to be done. The significance of honor can be seen when his mother says, “ Honor is love…” (Marquez 97). This crime was done out of the motivation of honor. It is downgraded by those who were bystanders by saying that honor is love, making the crime justified. Making it seem that they did it out of love so it shouldn’t be looked on as poorly. Making it seem as if anyone could have committed this crime since it was out of love.
Great analysis! I like how you mention how people thought the murder was to be done by the Vicario brothers. However, could this be an example of a moral decision? Also, maybe mention more about the Marianismo aspect. Other than that, this is a great analysis.
Throughout each chapters in the book, the same story of Santiago Nasar’s death is retold, but as each chapters unfold, it is told with new information. In chapter 5, which is the last chapter of this book, reveals what really happened to Santiago on the day of his death. As mentioned before, this chapter juxtaposes to the four chapters prior to the fifth because the exact details are disclosed. Santiago’s death affected many people’s lives, and it seems to be quite a popular subject in most conversations, “For years we couldn’t talk about anything else” (M. 96). Previously, it was unknown to the audience on what type of weather it was like on the day of the murder, but Cristo Bedoya, who remembers the day notably well, clarifies “Of course it wasn’t raining, it was just going on seven and a golden sun was already coming through the windows” (M. 105). The most important part of this chapter, is that it reveals the exact details of Santiago’s death. Pedro and Pablo Vicario both saw Santiago at the same time and began chasing him with their knives. Santiago reached his house, but the door was locked, thus he was trapped. Placido Linero couldn’t see her son because he “was running toward the door from a different angle” (M. 117), and so she barred the door shut. The two brothers repeatedly stabbed Santiago until he fell to his knees, “Desperate, Pablo Vicario gave him a horizontal slash on the stomach, and all his intestines exploded out, Santiago Nasar was still for an instant, until he saw his own viscera in the sunlight, clean and blue, and he fell on his knees” (M. 119). I think it is ironic that Nasar’s innocence was questioned after he was killed. If only his innocence was considered before, his death would have been prevented. I really like the quote “My personal impression is the he died without understanding his death” (M. 101) because the narrator and most likely many other people, believe that Santiago was innocent and a scapegoat.
I also believe that Marquez makes us, the readers, question Santiago’s innocence. This created a feeling of guilt within the readers, because he discusses the death throughout the whole book, but only mentions the possibility of a false accusation of rape in the end. This leads the readers to feel guilty for automatically assuming his guilt, similar to the townspeople. However, it appears the townspeople had a chance to investigate and get information. Also, Angela is unable to give details about her and Santiago's relationship, only saying “he was my perpetrator”, creating doubt within the community. Along with this idea in the fifth chapter I also found Marquez’s use of magical realism when discussing the murder of Santiago interesting. Marquez writes about his spilled guts. Then describes Santiago as walking while his body is cut and his guts are falling out. In reality that would be impossible, but Marquez gives Santiago the ability to do is.
In chapter 5, the aftermath and death of Santiago Nasar are highlighted. His death was ultimately the result of bystanders, those who knew of the plot to kill Santiago but did not intervene. Many of said bystanders tried to justify their lack of intervention with reasoning, such as the priest. The priest knew of the plan, yet still went about his day to go see the bishop. In a way, this could symbolize religion abandoning Santiago. Another symbolic bystander is the colonel. Although he is the pillar of justice and law in the town, he decided not to stop the murder, and rather only inconvenienced the twins. The colonel’s lack of aid to Santiago could represent law/man not being at Santiago’s side when he most needed it. This lack of assistance goes along with what I think is the theme of the book, which I believe to be “The desire for honor can sometimes supersede man’s responsibility to be civilized”. This theme is also demonstrated in the townsfolks reluctance to step in, as it is apparently a code of honor to not become involved in others’ affairs when it involves honor.
“Victoria Guzman, for her part, had been categorical with her answer that neither she nor her daughter knew that the men were waiting for Santiago Nasar to kill him. But in the course of her years she admitted that both knew it when he came into the kitchen to have his coffee. They had been told it by a woman who had passed by after five o'clock to beg a bit of milk, and who in addition had revealed the motives and the place where they were waiting. ‘I didn't warn him because I thought it was drunkards' talk,’ she told me. Nevertheless, Divina Flor confessed to me on a later visit, after her mother had died, that the latter hadn't said anything to Santiago Nasar because in the depths of her heart she wanted them to kill him. She on the other hand, didn’t warn him because she was nothing but a frightened child at the time, incapable of a decision of her own, and she’d been all the more frightened when he grabbed her by the wrist with a hand that felt frozen and stony, like the hand of a dead man ” (1, 12-13).
ReplyDeleteSome common themes through both chapter one, and the article “Thirty-Eight Who Saw Murder Didn’t Call the Police”, are excuses, lies, and deceit. Both these characters admit to lying about their knowledge of the murder and gave a number of excuses as to why they did not warn Santiago of his death. This, very well, relates to the neighbours of Kitty Genovese in the case of her murder. In the article, we see a crazy amount of excuses that were given to the reporters. When asked why no one called the police until after the girl had been dead the witnesses said, “‘I didn’t want to get involved’”, “‘I don’t know’”, “‘I was tired…I went back to bed’”. These witnesses lack of action led to the death of an innocent girl, AND THIS IS ALL THEY HAVE TO SAY FOR THEMSELVES. The excuses given in both the book and the article show no form of guilt or sorrow from the witnesses. With all this in mind the author leaves the reader to question human nature. In New York the murder of Kitty became accepted as another iconic event symbolizing America’s collective loss of innocence and the beginning of a new, darker chapter of American history. Americans, especially those living in large cities like New York, had lost their moral footing, many decided, our civic values not what they once had been. In contrast, the death of Santiago, thus far in the book, seem to only have left an impact on his friends and family.
I agree with your analysis, however I think that the reason the people in New York did not want to get involve in the crime was because they were living in a rich neighborhood, meanwhile Kitty was living an apartment. This shows that these people did not get involved because she was a lower class citizen. This is similar to Victoria Guzman's story because she did not want to get involved in Santiago's murder because she hated the fact that he wanted to take her daughters virginity. All in all, no one wanted to intervene because it suited them personally.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIt is clear how the perception of time is fundamental when understanding the novel. For instance, the narrator is “trying to put the broken mirror of memory back together from so many scattered shards”, which shows the kaleidoscopic image that will be reflected throughout the whole narration since he is actually putting events together after 27 years; the recreation of the happening will be distorted and never clear. This can be seen by the fact that people do not remember the weather of that sad Monday. On one hand, “many people coinceded in recalling that it was a radiant morning” (GM, 4), whereas others “agreed that the weather was funereal, with a cloudy low sky” (GM, 4). The fact that Garcia Marquez shows this contradiction is to reflect how deformed and unclear, at the end, the narrator's story will be, since he will never have a clear story or explanation to what happened to his friend, Santiago Nasar, 27 years after his death.
ReplyDeleteTherefore, this brings to the idea of faith (which we have discussed in class after seeing the powerpoint), and how what happens may be put down to pure fate. This idea connects merely to Kitty Genovese’s crime in 1964:“It soon became clear that any number of neighbours had heard the woman’s scream or seen her attacker, and it became a widely accepted fact that no one had so much as telephoned the police”. (Reviving Kitty Genovese Case, And Its Passions). The fact that, in Brooklyn, the police department was not warned or advised about what was going on, is similar to the happenings in the events taking place in the village in the Caribbean shore: “ “I didn’t warn him because I thought it was drunkard talk” [Victoria Guzman] told me”. (Garcia Marquez, 13). However, in the novel, people actually knew what was going to happen to Santiago Nasar, and not only did not warn the police, but didn’t even warn Santiago himself, taking into account that the village was small and everybody knew each other. Nevertheless, it seems as if the police and Santiago Nasar, in both cases, were destined not to be warned, and that their death was unavoidable and inescapable.
Chapter two really shows the audience the severity of the lives women lead in the reserved Colombian culture of the town. Women did not really have the chance to make anything of themselves, instead their lives were bounded on all sides by tradition and the expectation to get married and have families. They did not go to school to learn things like math and science, instead they learned chores at home such as sewing, washing, and ironing. This is very well shown through Angela’s mother “‘They’re perfect’” (37), she’d say about her children. However, what she described as perfect was that the boys were brought up to be men and the women were brought up to be married. The idea that the woman in a marriage is expected to suffer and that no woman enters marriage expecting to be happy unless she is fortunate enough to love whichever man decides to court her is significant in this chapter. Angela repeatedly voiced the fact that she did not want to marry Bayardo San Roman but her family refuses to let her have her way and her mother even says, “‘Love can be learned too’” (35). This quote and idea is often highly debated and mainly looked at in arranged marriage, which is essentially the boat Angela is in. This idea is still looked at and pondered in culture today. In this Spanish culture, unlike Western culture, marriage is not based on love. when Bayardo San Román saw Angela and decided to marry her it was obviously not love that motivated this idea, it was her looks. A woman's worthiness as a wife was measured by her beauty in conjunction with her ability to gracefully run all aspects of a household. To win Angela’s love Bayardo wins a music box by buying every raffle ticket and then he gives the music box to her. This is a big deal because even something as simple as a gift can be a dangerous stain on a woman's reputation. It's immediately assumed that she's the one at fault for this odd act. strangely instead of love letters or long walks on the beach, material possessions are considered the sign of a romantic relationship and this is because it was considered attractive for men to be able to financially support the family; which Bayardo has clearly proven he can do. This passage shows how Angela’s views on love and marriage often differed from the society in which she lived because it is clear that she believes marriage should be based purely on love. Lastly, the main religion in Columbia is Catholicism and one of the main beliefs of catholics is the belief that people, especially women in this culture, should abstain from having sex before marriage. This is why Angela was immediately dropped by her day old husband because he came from a prestigious family and the idea of her being sexually before marriage was looked at as sloppy and very impure.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDelete“my sister Margot had gone to the docks by walking along the shore, and the people were too excited with the bishop's visit to worry about any other news. They’d placed the sick people in the archways to receive God’s medicine, and women came running out of their yards with turkeys and suckilng pigs and all manner of things to eat…”(21) In this passage i realized that the bishop's visit to their town could symbolize the people of the towns distraction from the reality of their neighbors situation, and also the refusal to believe that there is an impending tragedy brewing. It was extremely evident in this chapter that there will be a recurring theme of miscommunication between characters and dramatic irony. Every person who knew about the murderous plot the two brothers had on Santiago, but everyone figured that another person would tell him therefor resulted in nobody telling him. Gabriel Garcia Marquez uses dramatic irony in order to create drama and miscommunications between characters, and also to explain the events following up to Santiago being murdered. It seems like everyone knows a different puzzle to the story that each reveals a key piece of the events following the murder. If only the characters would have all talked to each other they might have been able to put the pieces of the puzzle together and possibly save Santiago. This is the key to the story, and Gabriel Marquez does a very good job at slowly introducing the characters in a 1st person and investigation style. This investigator narration style really contributes to the themes of mystery and the feeling of confusion that this situation revolves around.
In A Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez misleads the readers with the title. A chronicle is a telling of a story in chronological order. However, he writes in a journalistic style that seems to have no particular order of events and interviews of people. This investigative journalistic narration emphasizes the motif of mystery. The story of this day is repeated throughout the chapters. There is no order to the story as the narrator is trying to learn the true events, “ I returned to this forgotten village, trying to put the broken mirror of memory back together” (Marquez 6). Marquez writes this “mystery” novel about a murder in a non-mysterious way. The reader is aware of the death before it occurs, similar to the characters within the novel. Rather than using literary techniques to foreshadow This allows the reader to understand the Kitty-Genovese syndrome the characters were going through. It is shown that all the characters discussed were aware of Santiago’s imminent death. However, no one made any attempt to stop the murder or tell Santiago of it, besides the mysterious note left under the door. Marquez often discusses the weather of the day, which seems irrelevant and rarely discusses the note left under the door which would be a huge clue in this murder, where the question is not who done it but rather, why did nobody stop it? In chapter one, this note is rarely mentioned in comparison to something as irrelevant as the weather.
ReplyDeleteIn the novel Chronicle Of A Death Foretold written by Gabriel Marquez, is a journal of events about the life regarding a young man named Santiago Nasar. It is unclear however why Santiago is killed and the situation is portrayed by vague facts that don’t appear to be relevant to a reason why. Marquez includes facts such as, “he was always dreaming about trees” (Marquez 3). It has not been explained what significance trees have in the novel except the fact his mother had said, when you dream about trees, something good will happen. The only thing that happened however was his death, and I do not see why his mother would view this as a positive thing. His mood was also included as being, “An hour later remembered him as being a little sleepy but in a good mood, and he remarked to all of them it was a beautiful day Marquez 4). neither of these facts have any relevance as to why he was then killed later on in the book. The interviews don’t seem to be in any relevant order or a=contain any relevant facts. This can be seen as a way to inspire desire in the reader to put these facts together almost as a murder mystery to keep them reading. Letting the reader put the facts together and in order in the end as more of an interactive way to interest the reader.
ReplyDeleteWhen describing the setting of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez uses a plethora of imagery, including kinesthetic, olfactory, and visual. By doing so, Marquez immerses the reader more fully into the story and allows them to become deeply invested in it. The story takes place in a small town located in the Caribbean region, which is a mainly tropical area. A possible symbol that I noticed was the choice of biome. In tropical regions, the weather can vary greatly and is able to change in an instant, rarely staying the same for a long period of time. I feel like the inconsistency of the weather goes hand in hand with the views of the other characters of the book, as many statements made by some characters seem to differ greatly with others and almost seem to butt heads. The fact that the town is characterized to be small is also of great significance, as Santiago’s death could’ve likely been better prevented in an area of higher population and monitoring.
ReplyDeleteYes, the setting of the novel (Columbia) to be exact I believe, does create a tone of simplicity, and as you mentioned can parallel with the story's theme of constant change, and uncertainty. The tropical region being somewhat secluded and with uncertain weather helps the reader enter a setting of relaxation but also a sense of fear simultaneously. I like what you said about the small town possibly signifies how the death was that much more stoppable, or preventable due to more people knowing of the information of the town, as well as it's people, also making it more shocking that nobody would stand up for a person they would all apparently know fairly well. Overall instructing analysis, I actually got a lot out of that, I had never thought too much into the setting because, the setting was based off a true story I assumed, so I never considered it a part of the author's craft.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteIn chapter 2, Garcia Marquez fully introduces the fundamental character of Bayardo San Roman, in order to slowly put together the shattered pieces of Santiago Nasar's murder. Now, the author has given the reader a more cultural and contextual insight of the motive of this murder, by describing that aspects of a traditional colombian life. For instance, gender role is a predominant feature in this novel, and is clearly seen in chapter 2, when GM describes how Angela Vicario and her sisters were reared to get married. By doing so, the writer bends the rules of a first person narrator, since it also acts as a third-person omniscient, knowing what the characters are feeling. This, consequently, provides the reader with a deeper insight of the typical traditions and customs of colombia, as well as the behavior of the society towards it. The fact that the narrator knows how Angela and her sister had “grown up under the rigor of a mother iron” (GM, 37), offers the reader a broader understanding of the familiar situation in the Vicario’s household. Angela was “raised to suffer” (GM, 31) in order to fit perfectly in the society’s housewife standards. To the Vicario’s the fact that Angela was being offered to marry a wealthy and prestigious man meant bringing honor to the family, as well as fortune. It is clear, therefore, how gender roles contribute to the image of Family Honor, which, as we have seen, is something Angela nor Santiago complies to, which leads to the tragic ending.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDelete“... he was alone in a tinfoil airplane and flying through the almond trees without bumping into anything” (M. 3-4).
In the beginning chapter of Gabriel Garcia Marquez’s Chronicle of a Death Foretold, he uses foreshadow and contrasting descriptions of the weather to tell the audience Nasar’s impending death. The quote above mention one of Santiago’s dream about trees, and oftentimes dreams foreshadow bad things that are going to happen. In his dream, he is passing through a wood of almond trees with ease. Santiago felt happy and content, but it was short lived because he woke up feeling as if he was splattered in bird poop. As the story progresses we learn that Pablo and Pedro Vicario, who are identical twins, had publicly announced that they’re planning on killing Santiago. As a result, many people knew about Santiago’s impending death, but not one person tried to put an end nor tried to warned Santiago of the Vicario brothers’ plan. So we can conclude that the trees, in this case, represents people that Santiago met but did not inform him. The bird poop symbolizes his coming death. Some people that saw him on the day that he died recalled that “it was a radiant morning with a sea breeze” (Marquez 4). But to a few others, they disagreed and remembered the weather was “funereal, with a cloudy, low sky” (Marquez 4). The contrast between these two descriptions of the weather most likely represents people’s thoughts and feelings towards Santiago’s death. People who recalled the weather being radiant with a sea breeze, probably was (somewhat) happy to learn that he was going to die. Whereas those who recalled the morning to be funereal and gloomy, most likely knew that the brothers are wrong and that Santiago’s life will have an unfortunate ending, but there is nothing that they could have done.
Wow great analysis! I like how you mentioned the fact that the dream had played into his death. When I had first read the book, I hadn't noticed that but after reading it a second time I have. His dream shows exactly how he died, He is happy just like he is in his dream. Then all the sudden he dies and I think him dying symbolizes the bird poop. I also feel like his mother had a role in the foreshadowing of his death through this passage. For example, his mother says that the dream doesn’t mean anything bad and that it will be ok. This is exactly how everyone the Vicario twins told about them planning to Santiago reacted. They hadn’t done anything and had assumed the wrong message by assuming that they were just drunk and not going to actually do it.
DeleteIn chapter two Gabriel Garcia Marquez really shows the social hierarchies of the time. Rich powerful men could effortlessly rule over anyone else without question. The powerful man oppressing every other character in the book is Bayardo San Roman. He showed up in their town along with a plethora of fairy tales and rumors about his life and origins. It turns out that almost none of these rumors are true, but that does not stop Bayardo San Roman from using these misconceptions about him, along with his suave charm, in order to get what he wants. He first uses his charm to win over the Vicario family in order to marry their most beautiful and youngest daughter Angela Vicario. But he had not used his charm to win over his soon to be wife, he saw that unnecessary, instead he used his charm to win over her family rendering Angela powerless against her opposition. “It was Angela Vicario who didn’t want to marry him. “he seemed too much of a man for me,” she told me. Besides Bayardo San Roman hadn’t even tried to win court her, but he had bewitched the family with his charm.” (pg 34) Angela Vicario was completely defenseless against Beyardo’s power. She was forced to marry him, and when she protested to her own mother about how she cannot have a marriage without love, her mom said “love can be learned too”. This would be insanity in today's society, no man has that much power over people. That is how much times have changed in the past 80 years.
ReplyDeleteIn the second chapter of the book, it appears to bring up the topic of predetermined and gender roles among men and women in the Latin American culture. Poncio Vicario and Purisima del Carmen are Angela and the twin brothers’ parents. The parents raised the twins as men, “the brothers were brought up to be men” (M. 31), whereas “girls had been reared to get married” (M. 31). Boys are brought up to be men, and there's not much to say about it because it's simple as that. On the other hand, girls have a “sacred duty”.” From birth, they are nurtured to get married. Some examples of things that girls will know how to do are “screen embroidery, sew by machines, weave bone lace, wash and iron, and make artificial flowers” (M. 31). All of these examples are housework. At the time, like many other women in different countries, Latin American women had to fulfill their predetermined roles. Which is to be an obedient wife, loving mother, and be diligent with house work. Women in Latin American culture today do still have the role of being a steady housekeeper, but the rate of women in the working classes have greatly increased, and it does not seem to be slowing down in the near future. On the same page, Marquez writes “there were no better-reared daughters,” and “... because they've been raised to suffer.” This makes me cringe and kind of disturbed because it clearly seems that women were treated like animals and an object. Marquez wrote that women were “raised to suffer,” which we can conclude that a woman’s worthiness as a wife was judged by how great and diligent she was at keeping her house together. If women were raised to suffer, then I wonder what most women thought about marriage. Are they happy to get married? Excited? Pleased? Women must have entered into a marriage without expecting much, unless she is fortunate enough to have a loving and caring husband.
ReplyDeleteI thought your analysis of this was very interesting. Seeing as Angela was not the perfectly reared daughter and she was found out and rejected. This was Marquez making commentary on the role of women and how those who strayed from societal norms were punished. And those involved, or supposedly involved, would be felt with severely; Santiago. I also thought it was interesting that it was assumed to then be the woman's fault for having an affair before marriage because she made it out to that she had no choice in the matter. Also, I found it interesting that the after was blind and Angela never did say who was her perpetrator and that she, "was protecting someone who really loved her”(104). I noticed how this slightly parallels with the myth of Oedipus and how he blinded himself after sleeping with someone he shouldn't have. Also and that he died shortly after because of, “his moral pain” that had, “carried him off”(96). This was reported by Angela showing how her father could not live with the unjust act he had committed and then condemned another to what should have been his fate.
Delete“Maria Alejandrina Cervantes had left the door open of her house unbarred. I took leave of my brother, crossed the veranda where the mulatto girls' cats were sleeping curled up among the tulips, and opened the bedroom door without knocking. The lights were out, but as soon as I went in I caught the smell of a warm woman and I saw the eyes of an insomniac leopard in the darkness, and then I didn’t know anything else about myself until the bells began to ring” (68).
ReplyDeleteThis quote in chapter 3 was very interesting to me and took me a little to understand so I just felt like breaking it down in a blog post. In this quote Marquez uses symbolism, imagery, and slang to promote the theme of love vs lust. Let’s break this down piece by piece. The first important image is the veranda, the veranda symbolizes how Santiago is on his way to creating his goals, which is essentially bedding Maria.Verandas can also indicate a lackadaisical approach to life, enjoying the finer things in life, and appreciating those around you. The finer things being sex, and he is appreciating Maria. The lackadaisical approach suggest that sex is something of no greater importance than for fun and pleasure, which frankly is what it is to Maria and Santiago. Though Santiago truly loves Maria, lust gets in his way. “where the mulatto girls’ cats were sleeping curled up among the tulips” this line is talking about how lust affects true emotion. First things first, there is slang that the reader must understand, the word mulatto. Mulatto simply means a person of mixed white and black ancestry. Next, we look at the significance of both the cats, and tulips. Tulips symbolize perfect love while, in this case, cats symbolize lust. The imagery of the cat being curled up around tulips shows that the cat is guarding, or blocking, the tulips. or in other words lust blocks love. Next we see the term “warm women” and this slang is generally referring to a sexually playmate or a whore. He then states “ I saw the eyes of an insomniac leopard” leopards symbolize sensuality and physical strength and in this case the leopard symbolizes Santiago looking at himself and seeing nothing more than a strong sensual, hunter. The insomniac eyes remind him that lust is always flourishing in the night. The bells ringing symbolize the fact that lust had completely taken over his senses. So putting all that information together the general idea of this quote is that Santiago is sleeping with Maria, but in depth the quote is saying that sex can be purely out of love or lust, and in this case they choose lust, which can only block them from having a serious relationship.
Garcia Marquez’s unique style and narrations presents the unalterable theme of time. It is clear how the tragic death of Santiago Nasar was preventable, and the fact that the townspeople knew about it and did not warn him makes it even more disastrous. The author makes it seem that there was nothing to be done against the dignity and will of the Vicario brothers in order to stop them, which makes it seem as if Nasar’s was destined to die that Monday morning. In chapter 3, the theme of time and the presence of an unstoppable will is seen in the fact that many of the characters ‘break’ their traditional working hours and time. For instance, this can be seen when the Vicario’s brother come in to the butcher’s shop on a Monday morning instead of a Friday, to sharpen and file their knives: “he was accustomed to see them on Fridays, but a little later, and wearing the leather apron they use for slaughtering.” (GM, 51). The fact that Pablo and Pedro are sharpening the knife at an unusual day and time then what is normally expected must have brought up certain doubts and suspicion of the butcher guy, although he did nothing about it. Another example can be seen in Clotilde Armenta’s shop, which she would normally “open at three-thirty in the morning”, where her husband “went to bed at three o’clock without closing” which made Clotilde Armenta wake “up earlier than usual”. (GM, 53) The fact that she woke up earlier because her husband had not closed the shop after his shift, and presenced the Vicario’s brothers at her shop is also a breakthrough the normal, habitual schedule. She, therefore, heard the Vicario brothers plan and tried to prevent them from carrying it out. If Clotilde had closed her shop at three-thirty as usual, the Pedro and Pablo Vicario would have not been able to stop by. If we actually break the Vicario’s trajectory up to Santiago’s death, preventing the change in schedules in Clotilde’s shop and their own butcher case, could Santiago Nasar’s death been prevented? This comes back to Garcia Marquez’s main theme of destiny, how there is no escaping from it, and the fact that honor gets its way back.
ReplyDeleteIn chapter three of A Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez utilizes visual imagery and characterizes Bayardo San Roman to demonstrate the social hierarchy and gender roles during this time in this Latin culture. Bayardo San Roman, the husband of the returned wife, was introduced and discussed within this chapter. He was a rich man in search of a wife and was aware of his ability to win people over with his charm and attain objects with his wealth. When originally introduced, Marquez uses visual imagery to describe his appearance and display his high position in society as a wealthy male. The narrator describes him, “he had the waist of a bullfighter, golden eyes, and a skin slowly roasted by a saltpeter” (Marquez 25). A saltpeter is a type of mineral that helps increase the time where you can use meat. Having skin roasted by saltpeter is displaying how San Roman is able to live a long happy life due to his excessive wealth keeping him fresh with new materialistic things. By describing him with golden eyes, the narrator is demonstrating the high position of San Roman in the social world and talking about his wealth. The narrator also describes how his wealth caused others to fear him, “his golden eyes had caused the shudder of fear in her (28). Women who he viewed as possible wives were unhappy with his power because it caused fear within them. Men had the majority of the power within this era, also wealth improved social standing. Women were forced into marriages by the family in order to gain financial or social standing. Not wanting to marry San Roman, her mother told her that, “Love can be learned too” (35). Her own mother didn’t change her mind based on her daughter’s unhappiness but rather said her daughter can make an adjustment in order to help the family. Women were seen as an item used to help improve a family’s level in society, however they remain powerless in decisions. A wealthy man brought fear into women, without having spoken or having had an altercation, demonstrating the massive power men had over women during this time in Latin culture.
ReplyDeleteIn chapter three of A Chronicle of A Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez creates a motif of honor involving the twin brothers. They both claim innocence based on the idea that they did it in order to protect their sister’s honor. The twins believed that fighting to protect honor justified the atrocity they committed. Their belief in that justification was so strong that they told many people around the town about their plan, who in return laughed it off. In the trial the twins used that justification to their advantage, “the lawyer stood by the thesis of homicide in legitimate defense of honor” (Marquez 48). This idea of honor is that the brothers aimed to kill the man who took their sister’s virginity and in their eyes, ruined her marriage. This idea of protecting your family’s honor is not outrageous however in today’s society it is obviously frowned upon to murder someone in order to do so. The view of protecting honor during this era and location is unclear due to the fact that quickly following the arrest, the twin’s family flees the area, most likely avoiding conflict and drama involving the murder and also their daughter. Pablo’s fiance was totally in love with the idea of her future husband defending a woman's honor as she saw that admirable and promised to marry him the second he was released from jail after committing this heinous crime. Prudencia’s mother saw them as they were on their way to murder Santiago. The twins told her they were in a rush, and without having to tell her of their future actions, she responded, “ Honor doesn’t wait” (62). Marquez makes it apparent that the overall view on honor was not solidified between the whole community. When telling the townspeople about the plotted murder, many laughed it off believing it to be a joke even the authorities did not take the threat seriously. Did they truly not take it seriously or possibly let it continue because they believed protecting honor was right?
ReplyDeleteIn chapter two of the Novel Chronicle Of A Death Foretold, Gabriel Marquez reveals a theme of gender inequality through what a man and a woman are expected to do for their families This can be seen when the author is talking about Angela’s father and says, “ Her father, Poncio Vicario, was a poor man’s goldsmith, and he’d lost his sight from doing so much fine work in gold in order to maintain the honor of the house” (Marquez 30). This quote portrays the hardship that a man had in this time era to maintain the reputation of his family. He father was pressed to work so hard that he had ended up losing his sight. This shows the extent men were supposed to live up to in this time period as well and how much stereotypes played into people’s lives. woman were treated in the sense that they were supposed to please their man and take care of the household. This can be seen when Marquez says, “ She devoted herself with such spirit of sacrifice to the care of her husband and the rearing of her children that at times one forgot she still existed (Marquez 31). This quote shows how women were treated unequally when it came to family matters as well. Angela’s mother devoted so much of her life to taking care of her children and husband, that they often forgot about her because she was constantly doing household chores. It can be seen that women were taken for granted in this time but they were doing what was expected of them.
ReplyDeleteIn chapter three of the novel Chronicle Of A Death Foretold, Gabriel Marquez reveals a theme of how family honor can persuade people to do what they need to in order to preserve it. This can be seen when the author sets up the scene of Angela’s brothers finding out and says, “ After their sister revealed the name to them, the Vicario twins went to the bin in the pigsty where they kept their sacrificial tools…” (Marquez 50). This quote shows how outraged the brothers were to find out who had taken the virginity of their sister. They felt this so unfair that they felt they had to take matters into their own hands. It shows the dedication and love they have for their sister that they are willing to do anything in her honor. However it also shows what dark depths people are willing to go to in order to protect their families honor in this time. throughout this entire chapter, it is talked about how these brothers were good and how no one believed them when they said they were going t kill Santiago. One man had even said, “ I thought they were so drunk” (Marquez 51). This shows that since everyone thought they were good kids, that when they had told them of their plan, they had shrugged it off and thought they were just drunk. If two good brothers could snap to the extent that they would murder a man in the name of honor, it shows how important honor was in this time.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNathan Maisonville (P7)
ReplyDelete“Angela Vicario only dared hint at the inconvenience of a lack of love, but her mother demolished it with a single phrase: ‘Love can be learned too.’” (Marquez)
In chapter two, we learn that Angela Vicario does not want to marry Bayardo San Roman. After hinting at her lack of desire for this, Angela’s mother states “love can be learned too”. This statement was quite ironic in my opinion, as love is not something that you learn, but rather experience. Love is not something that can simply be taught in a classroom, it is something that one must seek out for themselves and discover on their own. By writing this, Marquez is further developing the setting as well, as it is now quite clear that the story takes place in a culture where love and marriage are more of an investment and less of a life choice. Also, it should be noted that this small chunk of dialogue by Angela’s mother also demonstrates the role of women in the town, as marriage seems to be an essential part of life for them, even if it is forced. The real event that the story is based off of was in 1951, so this ideal that women need to be married to make it or be successful in life is not too surprising. The 50’s was still very much a time of women being treated as inferior to males, and I feel like the text somewhat reflects that.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNathan Maisonville (P7)
ReplyDelete"'We're going to kill Santiago Nasar,' he said. Their reputation as good people was so well-founded that no one paid any attention to them. 'We thought it was drunkards' baloney,' several butchers declared, just as Victoria Guzman and so many others did who saw them later." (Marquez Chapter 3)
The way that the brothers practically walk around telling everybody that they are going to kill Santiago and still don’t face any resistance gives this story an almost gloomy, depressing feeling for me. It’s somewhat of a tragedy how, despite everyone being well aware of the brothers’ intentions, Santiago still meets his doom. The excerpt that I took out of this chapter helps to demonstrate the theme that I feel the book expresses. In Chronicle of a Death Foretold, a theme that conveys the importance of bystanders is shown. Almost everyone that the brothers come in contact with have an opportunity to stop them, yet they don’t, which is arguably ultimately the reason for Santiago Nasar’s demise. This exemplifies how, in some scenarios, it can all come down to the actions of the bystanders. Even someone with as little of a role as sharpening knifes can be the deciding factor of a make-or-break scenario.
In chapter four of A Chronicle of A Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez displays a possible feeling of guilt by the Vicario twins. However, the townspeople do not seem to be mourning the loss of Santiago. The autopsy is barely legal and may possibly hold incomplete information as it was completed by a priest. The mayor had required this autopsy to be performed by the priest, “even the mayor knew that his autopsy would have no legal standing. Nevertheless, he made him carry out the order” (Marquez 74). Not only does this display the possible innaccruary of the autopsy but rather it demonstrates the lack of love or sympathy for Santiago Nasar and his family. The mayor doesn’t even allow a legitimate autopsy. The process of this autopsy also shows a lack of sympathy towards Santiago and possible living relatives, who are not named. The priest rudely disposed of Nasar’s body, “the priest had pulled out the sliced-up intestines by the roots, but in the end he didn’t know what to do with them, and he gave them an angry blessing and threw them into the garbage pail” (76). The priest gave his intestines an angry blessing, demonstrating his possible dislike for Santiago. Later, he then dumps them in the trash can. After displaying the lack of sympathy the townspeople are feeling, Marquez then hints at guilt felt by the Vicario brothers within jail. The Vicario brothers were uncomfortable with themselves in prison, “they’d gone three nights without sleep, but they couldn’t rest because as soon as the began to fall asleep they would commit the crime all over again” (78). Although they claimed they would repeat their actions that protected the honor of their sister, the twins seem to have an unconscious guilt. Their inability to sleep is caused by their brain’s constant thinking about the crime. Even though they seem to be okay with it, they still will be unable to erase that from their memory. And that memory could forever harm their brain.
ReplyDeleteOh my goodness this analysis! This opens a new light in understanding the psychological meaning behind the bystanders. For example, maybe they thought negatively of Santiago because he has done things in the past that may have angered them. Of course this is not valid in the text, as it gives no textual evidence, but this could maybe symbol (along with the religious views) the reason why people never really interacted with Nasar to prevent his murder.
Delete“Thus, right at the start of the Bible, the number 7 is identified with something being “finished” or “complete.” From then on, that association continues, as 7 is often found in contexts involving completeness or divine perfection. So we see the command for animals to be at least seven days old before being used for sacrifice (Exodus 22:30), the command for leprous Naaman to bathe in the Jordan River seven times to effect complete cleansing (2 Kings 5:10), and the command for Joshua to march around Jericho for seven days (and on the seventh day to make seven circuits) and for seven priests blow seven trumpets outside the city walls (Joshua 6:3–4). In these instances, 7 signifies a completion of some kind: a divine mandate is fulfilled.”
ReplyDeleteIn chapter 4 of Chronicles of a Death Foretold, the narrator begins describing the autopsy and “massacre” that the Doctors and authorities performed on Santiago Nasar’s corpse. This procedure was a disastrous and unbearable, as seen through the author’s thorough description and details of the happening, in which all the townspeople were present during the ceremony. In this description, the narrator makes reference to the fact that “Seven of the many wounds were fatal”. (GM, 75). Culturally, these people were highly catholic practitioners, and religion was a fundamental basis in their society. Therefore, taking this into account, we can consider the number 7 as a holy and sacred number in catholicism, showing the author’s use of craft. “Right at the start of the Bible, the number 7 is identified with something being “finished” or “complete.” We can assimilate this with the situation present in Chronicles of a Death Foretold, since the killing of Santiago Nasar by the Vicario brothers was a duty and a commitment they had to carry out. The fact that they left 7 deadly wounds shows the ‘finishing’ or completing of this task.
In chapter five of A Chronicle of A Death Foretold, Gabriel Garcia Marquez first describes the actual murder that had occurred rather than other events either prior or following the murder. By the final chapter, the reader is finally able to question Santiago Nasar’s innocence as the narrator mentions that he is clueless as to why he is dying. It is mentioned in chapter four, that Angela Vicario’s accusation may not be completely truthful. As the timing just would have been near impossible to work out without anyone having a clue. On the morning of his impending death, Santiago Nasar goes to visit his fiance who is humiliated by the news of Santiago taking another girl’s virginity. Clueless about what is going on, his fiance’s father sheds light on the fact that there is a plot to murder him, to which he replied, “I don’t understand a God-damned thing” (Marquez 114). Santiago expresses his confusion leading the reader and possibly bystanders to question his participation in this alleged accusation. The townspeople show no sympathy to Santiago as no one tells him of his death. But rather, the townspeople had been ready to watch, “the people had stationed themselves on the square the way they did on parade days” (115). Parades are used as a form of celebration, Marquez describes the setup similar to a parade to display to the reader the lack of sympathy the people felt toward Santiago. Rather than look at his possible innocence, they line up to watch his murder take place, as if it is entertainment to all of them. Even when questioning Angela Vicario she could never come up with the story of when this went down, but rather all she does is describe Santiago, “he was my perpetrator” (100). Unable to give details about the event that caused someone their life would hopefully raise some doubt within people.
ReplyDeleteThe love letters that Angela Vicario send to Bayardo hold great significance in chapter 4. Traditionally, the function of love letters are to express one’s true love, or longing, for their partner. The physical letter shows its receiver the thought and hard work the giver put into making it but the context of the letter is what shows the true emotion and passion the giver feels about the receiver. However, in the book, Bayardo does not value Angela’s love letters for their content. Just the act of her sending the letters gives him the confidence the she is in love with him and wants him to return to her. Angela’s obsessive letter writing fits under the theme of rituals in this book because the letters symbolize the ritualistic nature of romantic love in their society. The actual contents of her letters is not important—just the fact that she sends them and he receives them is all that matters. They seem to relate to each other according to conventional rules of romance. First through gifts from Bayardo to Angela, and next through love letters from Angela to Bayardo. The fact that Angela Vicario didn't know what to write, and that Bayardo didn't care to read or know what she had written, highlights the importance of the ritual of writing and receiving letters as opposed to the importance of the content. His lack of interest in the content seems to contrast with the purpose of writing letters, similar to the novel's overall disinterest in the truth surrounding the murder. It also shows us that the concepts of love in Colombia are firmly rooted in the actions between two lovers, as opposed to the understanding between them.
ReplyDeleteIn chapter four the guilt and regret of the town becomes evident. This is shown through quotes that the townspeople later say. Everyone felt horrible about the crime, and most of the time people were even sickened about it. “...Colonel Lazaro Aponte, who had seen and caused so many repressive massacres, became a vegetarian as well as a spiritualist.” (76) Even someone who had killed so many and had seen so many other people killed could not stomach this brutal murder. Before the murder occurred almost no one intervened, because it was a matter of honor, but after the incident everyone dropped the fact that it was a “matter of honor” and mourned Santiago Nasar's death. Some people even questioned the fact that the death was even justified by honor. It is debatable whether or not Santiago Nasar is even guilty of taking Angela Vicario’s virginity, the whole reason the Vicario twins killed him in the first place. Santiago is even compared to Jesus Christ. “He had a deep stab in the right hand. The report says: ‘It looked like a stigma of the crucified Christ.”(75) This is the perfect person to allude Santiago Nasar to. Jesus was killed by people who claimed to be justified in his killing, while he was still innocent. Santiago was extremely oblivious to his inevitable death, and if he was actually guilty of taking Angela Vicario’s honor wouldn't he have been extremely conscious of the Vicario twins impending revenge for his actions. I believe that he is innocent, and that the rest of the town knows this. That is why they are all so sad and feeling so guilty after his death, but it is really convenient to hide behind the fact that the murder was justified as a matter of “honor”.
ReplyDeleteAs the narrator recounts the murder, I found it interesting that amidst the flurry of the murder, many people’s senses became distorted. Victoria Guzman told Placida Linero that she saw “Satiago Nasar come in through the door on the square and go up the open stairs to the bedrooms…he was wearing his white suit and carrying something that I couldn’t make out well in his hand” (116). If Nasar had not entered the house, where did the sight of Nasar come from? Was she imagining him? Or was she merely just lying to Placida Linero? This goes back to the authenticity of the evidence that the narrator collected about the murder. To what extent are the accounts accurate and truthful? As for Placida Linero, she heard “she heard Santiago Nasar’s shouts, and she heard the terrified pounding on the door, but she thought he was upstairs, insulting the Vicario brothers from the balcony in his room”. (117) I found it hard to understand the turn of events. If Nasar was just outside the door, how could she mistake her son to be upstairs on the balcony? Couldn’t she hear her son from the other side of the door?
ReplyDelete
DeleteYour point about senses being distorted stuck out to me. When people’s minds go into panic mode, they can often end up with memories that are skewed or sometimes even completely falsified. I thought it was interesting how the result of this was also seen in the debate over the weather conditions of that day, as there were many conflicting statements regarding it. Trauma can have an enormous effect on memory, and I feel like this is seen many times in the story. It could even be possible that the minds of the townsfolk put Santiago in a position of likely being innocent because of witnessing his death with their own eyes, as it was stated in the book that, in the end, many people didn’t truly believe he did it.
The recurring theme of chaos in the town is extremely evident in chapter 5. One of the symbols that contributes to the chaos of the town is the Bishop's arrival. Every single person in the entire town will be flocking to see the Bishop speak, even though that it is extremely evident that he does not care about the town. It seemed that every single person knew about Santiago Nasar’s inevitable death except for him. One of the many reasons for this was that every person in the town was preoccupied by the arrival of the bishop that they had not thought of telling Santiago Nasar. This is still unlikely because it seemed like his death was all that everyone was talking about even before his death. His death was so foretold that some people even thought he had died before he actually did. The reason for his death seemed to be justified. The Vicario brothers were taking their sister Angela’s honor back. It is unsure whether or not Santiago Nasar actually slept with Angela Vicario. “...not even the most improbable that Santiago Nasar had been the cause of the wrong. The friends of Angela Vicario who had been her accomplices in the deception went on saying for a long time that she had shared her secret with them before the wedding, but that she hadn’t revealed any name.” (99-100) This has some serious implications for the Vicario brothers, Angela and even the entire town. The moral implications of this are horrendous. An entire town knew about a murder, but did not get involved because it was a matter of honor which turned out to be untrue.
ReplyDeleteChaos is for sure a major piece of the story, however, although I’m not disagreeing with you, I’d like to say that I personally believe that guilt is a more prominent reoccurrence in the story. For example, it could be said that the townsfolk don’t interfere because they would feel guilty for denying someone’s attempts to restore honor, as honor seems to be almost sacred within the town. However, despite not interfering, they still end up feeling guilty that they did not intervene and prevent the death of a man who has not yet been proven guilty/innocent. Some people even feel so guilty that they themselves start to suffer.
DeleteBtw nice analysis
DeleteIn chapter 4 of Chronicle Of A Death Foretold, remorse can be seen through the way the town portrays how brutal the murder of Santiago was and the effect that it had left on certain characters in the book. This can be seen when Santiago’s body is given and autopsy and the priest says, “ It was as if we killed him all over again after he was dead” (Marquez 72). Santiago was already brutally murdered by the Vicario twins and it had made matter worse that they had to autopsy the body. It was already so disfigured, they felt it was inhuman to disfigure it anymore, even though it was in a humane sense. it shows how he had felt bad to to make any further changes to his body since he had been murdered for a reason that hasn’t been proven yet. The death hadn’t only played a toll on those who had to make the autopsy on Santiago, it had also affected the Vicario twins who had killed Santiago. This can be seen when Pedro Vicario says, “ No matter how much I scrubbed with soap and rags, I couldn't get rid of the smell. This shows two things, both literally and metaphorically. He feels as if he couldn’t get the smell off of him, which is probably true. However, it also shows that no matter what he did, he will never be able to move past the fact that he had murdered a man. No matter what he does, he will always live with the guilt of him taking the life of someone else. It also shows the effect that the murder had on him even though he thought that he was doing the right thing by protecting his sister and family honor.
ReplyDeleteIn the beginning of chapter 4, Marquez mainly writes about Santiago Nasar’s body and of his autopsy that was performed by the priest, Father Carmen Amador (the town physician was absent). Nasar’s corpse can be compared to that of a butchered animal. The dogs, “aroused by the smell of death” (M. 73), wants to eat his guts. This makes sense because dogs cannot differentiate a rabbit’s guts and that of a human being. Fortunately, the dogs were locked up in a stable, and were later taken to a place far away. But Nasar’s luck ended there, as his autopsy went wrong on so many levels. Even the priest, who was in charge of performing the autopsy, said “It was as if we killed him all over again after he was dead” (M. 72). The post-mortem examination went so awry, when they returned Nasar’s corpse it did not look like him at all, “They gave us back a completely different body” (M. 76). Lastly, to make things worse, the guts that the dogs wanted to eat so badly were thrown into a garbage pail. The representation of Nasar as a sacrificial animal, is a symbol of Santiago Nasar being sacrificed for the sins of his community. The community committed a sin by knowing Santiago’s impending death, but could not be bothered to prevent it.
ReplyDelete
DeleteI agree with your analysis of the autopsy and never thought of Santiago Nasar’s corpse as being a symbol! Also, I believe the almost invalid autopsy demonstrates the disrespect towards Santiago expressed by the townspeople. Santiago was not even given the right of legitimate autopsy. The mayor ordered the priest to do it anyways. Even the disposal of his body parts was incorrect, he gave them an angry blessing and threw them into the garbage pail” (76). The discussion on the guts also demonstrates the magical realism Marquez utilizes in order to add graphics to the discussion of the murder and body itself.
In chapter five the magical realism aspect of the book really emphasizes the fact that Santiago Nasar is innocent. For example when Pedro Vicario was talking to the investigator about killing Santiago he declared, “‘The strange thing is that the knife kept coming out clean’, ‘I’d given it to him at least three times and there wasn’t a drop of blood’” (117-118). The event is an implication that Santiago was not supposed to die. Also, the fact that he walked around his house while carrying his intestines again reitterates this message through magical realism. Magical realism is used yet again to portray Santiago as a figure of Christ when the narrator writes “The knife went through the palm of his right hand” (117). This is a parallel to Jesus’ crucifixion in that he was nailed through the palms. The walk that Santiago endures to the backside of his house while holding his intestines also parallels Jesus' walk to Mt. Sinai while carrying the cross. Jesus dies due to the sins of others and so does Santiago, both are innocent, but both die. Symbolism also emphasizes Santiago’s innocence. Davina Flor tells the narrator, “‘He was wearing his white suit and carrying something that I couldn’t make out well in his hand, but it looked like a bouquet of roses’” (116). “He” is referring to Santiago on the day of his death. He is wearing a white suit which is significant because white symbolizes purity, virginity, and innocence. Which is almost ironic because Santiago is far from pure and definitely not a virgin however, in this case, he is innocent. Also red roses symbolize sacrifice which again alludes to the similarities of Jesus and Santiago because Jesus sacrificed himself for our sins.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the analysis and the point you make, on how the craft of magic realism and symbolism used by the author reflects Santiago's true innocence in the Vicario brother's claim. However, as we have read in the book, the author describes Santiago's death as an act of faith and destiny, and that it was undoubtedly inevitable. Although you state that he was innocent and that Marquez shows that he was not to blame, do you think that his death was the cause of another crime/unmoral action?
DeleteIn the final chapter of Chronicle Of A Death Foretold, even though the people of the town had felt remorse and the death was the only thing they could talk about, they had down nothing to stop the revenge. This can be seen when the narrator says, “ But most of those who could have done something to prevent the crime and did not consoled themselves with the pretext that affairs of honor are sacred monopolies…” (Marquez 97). In this quote shows that those who could have done something to prevent Santiago’s murder hadn’t done so. They believed that this was a sacred honor to be don by the boys. In previous chapter, they had used excuses such as they were nice bos and they could have never done anything like this, as well as the excuse of people thinking they had just been drunk. It can be seen that no one does anything to intervene because they thought as if it needed to be done. The significance of honor can be seen when his mother says, “ Honor is love…” (Marquez 97). This crime was done out of the motivation of honor. It is downgraded by those who were bystanders by saying that honor is love, making the crime justified. Making it seem that they did it out of love so it shouldn’t be looked on as poorly. Making it seem as if anyone could have committed this crime since it was out of love.
ReplyDeleteGreat analysis! I like how you mention how people thought the murder was to be done by the Vicario brothers. However, could this be an example of a moral decision? Also, maybe mention more about the Marianismo aspect. Other than that, this is a great analysis.
DeleteThroughout each chapters in the book, the same story of Santiago Nasar’s death is retold, but as each chapters unfold, it is told with new information. In chapter 5, which is the last chapter of this book, reveals what really happened to Santiago on the day of his death. As mentioned before, this chapter juxtaposes to the four chapters prior to the fifth because the exact details are disclosed. Santiago’s death affected many people’s lives, and it seems to be quite a popular subject in most conversations, “For years we couldn’t talk about anything else” (M. 96). Previously, it was unknown to the audience on what type of weather it was like on the day of the murder, but Cristo Bedoya, who remembers the day notably well, clarifies “Of course it wasn’t raining, it was just going on seven and a golden sun was already coming through the windows” (M. 105). The most important part of this chapter, is that it reveals the exact details of Santiago’s death. Pedro and Pablo Vicario both saw Santiago at the same time and began chasing him with their knives. Santiago reached his house, but the door was locked, thus he was trapped. Placido Linero couldn’t see her son because he “was running toward the door from a different angle” (M. 117), and so she barred the door shut. The two brothers repeatedly stabbed Santiago until he fell to his knees, “Desperate, Pablo Vicario gave him a horizontal slash on the stomach, and all his intestines exploded out, Santiago Nasar was still for an instant, until he saw his own viscera in the sunlight, clean and blue, and he fell on his knees” (M. 119). I think it is ironic that Nasar’s innocence was questioned after he was killed. If only his innocence was considered before, his death would have been prevented. I really like the quote “My personal impression is the he died without understanding his death” (M. 101) because the narrator and most likely many other people, believe that Santiago was innocent and a scapegoat.
ReplyDeleteI also believe that Marquez makes us, the readers, question Santiago’s innocence. This created a feeling of guilt within the readers, because he discusses the death throughout the whole book, but only mentions the possibility of a false accusation of rape in the end. This leads the readers to feel guilty for automatically assuming his guilt, similar to the townspeople. However, it appears the townspeople had a chance to investigate and get information. Also, Angela is unable to give details about her and Santiago's relationship, only saying “he was my perpetrator”, creating doubt within the community. Along with this idea in the fifth chapter I also found Marquez’s use of magical realism when discussing the murder of Santiago interesting. Marquez writes about his spilled guts. Then describes Santiago as walking while his body is cut and his guts are falling out. In reality that would be impossible, but Marquez gives Santiago the ability to do is.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNathan Maisonville (P7)
ReplyDeleteBystanders in Chapter 5
In chapter 5, the aftermath and death of Santiago Nasar are highlighted. His death was ultimately the result of bystanders, those who knew of the plot to kill Santiago but did not intervene. Many of said bystanders tried to justify their lack of intervention with reasoning, such as the priest. The priest knew of the plan, yet still went about his day to go see the bishop. In a way, this could symbolize religion abandoning Santiago. Another symbolic bystander is the colonel. Although he is the pillar of justice and law in the town, he decided not to stop the murder, and rather only inconvenienced the twins. The colonel’s lack of aid to Santiago could represent law/man not being at Santiago’s side when he most needed it. This lack of assistance goes along with what I think is the theme of the book, which I believe to be “The desire for honor can sometimes supersede man’s responsibility to be civilized”. This theme is also demonstrated in the townsfolks reluctance to step in, as it is apparently a code of honor to not become involved in others’ affairs when it involves honor.
Sorry this is up so late, had some problems posting on sunday evening and never realized that it never got up in the end.
Delete