The narrated events of the first chapter bear great similarities to the articles on the murder of Kitty Genovese: many people in the town knew that Santiago Nasar was going to be killed that morning, yet no one did anything about it. The first mention that someone knew that two men were waiting to kill him was about the cook, Victoria Guzman. Her reasons for hating Santiago Nasar were well explained – he had made unwanted advances on her daughter, was apparently a horrible person like his father, and was strangely shocked by feeding rabbit guts to dogs. Perhaps Divina Flor had the same internal reasons – she was frightened by him, and if he died then she wouldn’t have to live with his constant attention. The comparison in the text of his hand to that of a dead man shows how soulless the two women thought he was, no better (and maybe better off as) a rotting corpse, in contrast to the more positive descriptions of him in the context of his mother and father. Santiago Nasar even had a chance to find out about his own impending death: “Someone who was never identified had shoved an envelope under the door with a piece of paper warning Santiago Nasar that they were waiting for him to kill him, and in addition, the note revealed the place, the motive, and other quite precise details of the plot” (15). That he somehow managed to not read the note under his own door is starting to seem like a sad sort of fate, like everything was pointing towards him dying that day. A proprietress near the place of the murder saw the two men who wanted to kill him and yet did nothing – but prayed for them to wait until after the bishop left. The fact that “many of those who were on the docks knew that they were going to kill Santiago Nasar” only adds to the sense of complacency of the townspeople – if an entire town knew that someone was going to die, why did no one act? When the mother of the narrator found out, she told her husband she was going “’to warn my dear friend Placida,’ she answered. ‘It isn’t right that everybody should know that they’re going to kill her son and she the only one who doesn’t’” (25). There is something not right about the fact that instead of trying to prevent the murder from happening, she would warn her friend that her son was about to be killed. Compared with the case of Kitty Genovese, the town seems to be actively avoiding trying to keep Santiago Nasar from being killed, whereas with Genovese, the witnesses were afraid of becoming involved with the incident. This is likely for the same reason that Vicario brothers wanted to kill Santiago Nasar – their sister, a bride, wasn’t a virgin. Perhaps the whole town just wanted him to die because they felt like he deserved to be murdered. However, because of this, his death seemed more like fate than anything, with all paths pointing towards his doom – and with an entire town accepting the fact that he was already dead, there doesn’t seem to be much of a way he could have avoided it.
Throughout the first chapter there is a huge element of dramatic irony. Now it is obvious that one must take into account that there really wouldn't be a plotline or story to tell without it though. The thing about the dramatic irony is that everyone, including the audience knows that Santiago will be killed, besides his mother. His mother is the last to know of the horrific event that will occur and sadly it's far too late when she finally finds out what will happen to her son. On pages nineteen and twenty, one can find specific examples of this dramatic irony. The author writes on page nineteen, “Many of those who were on the docks knew that they were going to kill Santiago Nasar.” This quote is a perfect example of the dramatic irony as it is also proof that it is hugely within the first chapter. The quote itself is very self explanatory as it blatantly proves the point of the element of dramatic irony in the chapter. Also found on page twenty, the author writes, “In reality, my sister Margot was one of the few people who still didn’t know that they were going to kill him.” Now this is a quote that more supports the element of the dramatic irony. Dramatic irony is when the audience knows something that will occur later on in the future that characters in the novel don’t know. If Nasar’s sister were to know that he was going to be murdered, there would be no dramatic irony to the chapter, but since she has no idea, it makes the dramatic irony possible. Along with his sister not knowing, his mother had no idea as well until one finally told her, but before she knew, there was a great amount of dramatic irony. Without the dramatic irony there would be no real mystery element to the story though since his mother, most likely, would try to stop her son being murdered.
I agree with your reasons of why he died and because fate had a role in his death. Just another thought would be why Santiago was chosen for this death to occur? I find it interesting how the narrator never addresses why it was Santiago, other than that he was rich and Angela didn't think her brothers would kill Santiago. Going off of that, was it only date or was it also Angela's condemnation essentially. Although as you mentioned the letter did have information warning Santiago, I find it baffling that fate would even have no one inform Santiago of his death sooner than it happening.
In chapter one of the novel Chronicle of a Death Foretold, the theme that everything happens for a reason and fate is evident. This novel is about the hours leading up to the death of a young man, Santiago Nasar. Almost everybody in this man’s village new that he was going to be killed, so how did he not know this atrocity was going to happen? This can be explained by fate. Santiago Nasar always used his back door and rarely his front door. Márquez writes, “Nevertheless, it was [at the front door], and not at the rear door, that the men who were going to kill him waited for Santiago Nasar, and it was through there that he went out to receive the bishop” (Márquez 11). Despite the fact that he would have to walk around the whole house, he still used the front door. This is an unfortunate fatal coincidence for Santiago. Later in the book it is explained that there was a letter written warning Santiago of his death with very specific details about how the murder would take place. Márquez writes, “The message was on the floor when Santiago Nasar left home, but he didn’t see it, nor did Divina Flor or anyone else until long after the crime had been consummated” (15). If Santiago or someone else in his household would have noticed the paper, his life could have been saved. It seems as if it was fate that he did not notice it. Both of these two events happened for a reason: to conceal Santiago Nasar’s fatal fate.
Gabriel García Márquez’s “Chronicle of a Death Foretold” and the murder of Kitty Genovese are very similar. In both murder cases, the neighbors and the townspeople know the murder will happen or is happening, yet all fail to act and stop the crime. In both cases, each person explained their excuse for not helping Kitty or for not warning Santiago. Many of the details about the murder of Kitty and Santiago are unfortunate coincidences used to hint at their sad fates. Both Santiago and Kitty had to be in the right place at the right time and both had people who refused to help or warn them. The neighbors and the townspeople all assumed someone had called the police/told Santiago of the Vicario’s plan to kill him. “No one even wondered whether Santiago Nasar had been warned, because it seemed impossible to all he hadn’t” had the people not assumed this and just told him, he have been able to correct the misunderstanding or hid from Pedro and Pablo (Márquez 20). Fate is a very paradoxical topic because its power is either believed or rejected and either way it is always questioned. Márquez uses fate to make the readers question the reality of the death and whether or not the death could have actually been prevented. Everyone avoids addressing Santiago’s supposed crime which causes the reader to question the severity of the crime and whether or not Santiago is actually guilty. Another significant thing to mention is the use of the word “chronicle” in the title. This word suggests that the events recounted in the book occur in chronological order, however Santiago Nasar’s murder actually unfolds in a spiraling fashion. The narrator has come back to his home town to receive different accounts of Nasar’s murder only to find each person’s version is different is some way. This, again, is contrary to the implication that the events are chronological. Márquez uses this idea of chronology to create a paradoxical effect. He mentions specific times that certain event, like Santiago waking up, occur. This creates the paradox that the recount is happening chronologically when it is not really chronological.
What a way to start a book, Gabriel Garcia Marquez starts off it by essentially giving away the ending. This unusual narration is used to give a sense that things are not as they should be. The narrator in this first chapter is the son of Santiago’s godmother, and is very close to Santiago. However, he was not shown as being in this Latin American setting while the death was taking place. He seemed to have had many connections with people and reveals through this first chapter how many people had known and not said anything. From the townspeople, as Santiago walked away from the dock, they said that, ‘it seemed impossible to all that he hadn’t,” been warned about the twins planning to murder him(22). This shows how people don’t want to deal with murder or other aspects of life that are hard and displeasing to conversation. When passing by on his way to the docks, many of the people he passed knew and just didn’t say anything. One of the shop owners asked the murders to wait and, “leave him for later,” instead of killing him right away(17). Instead of warning Santiago, she simply was delaying his death and not helping anything. Gabriel Garcia Marquez shows through this interaction that people think that delaying something that is tough, that will somehow make the pain less. The pain of death can not be lessened however. An interesting sight at the end of this chapter was a crowd after the death with a sound as if, “the wedding party had started up,” again(26). This shows how so many people knew, yet it was only until after the death that they came out to comfort and console his mother. Marquez, however, does not fixate on the murders and if they are guilty, but more on the reaction of the townspeople, or the lack thereof.
After rereading the first chapter, a few things came to my attention. One major thing was the style of writing used to tell the story. I find it interesting how the entire story could easily be quickly told, but the narrator rather plays games with the story, focusing on small details such as what Santiago looks like and what his style of hair is. It is like the narrator is controlling the reader’s thoughts by only filling them in on one piece at a time so they will make assumptions that may not be true based on what they have already heard. This style sets the story up for many twists and unexpected turns and makes the reader excited to keep reading to see if their assumptions come true. Another thing I found interesting was the focus on the weather in the first chapter. It remains to be seen the purpose of this, but it seems to be a symbol of some sort or possibly foreshadowing. The narrator focuses on the different accounts from different people on what they thought the weather was like that day. I believe the purpose of this is to show the difficulty in recollecting events from the past perfectly as days can morph together in one’s memory and therefore no one’s account of the past can be trusted completely.
My analysis is very similar to yours. I also noticed how long, and drawn out the telling of Santiago Nasar’s death is. It seems like the narrator could have easily retold the story in a shorter way, and also a simpler way. The story is told in a very confusing way that doesn’t go in chronological order, and adds unimportant information. Like you mentioned, it seems unnecessary to describe the weather on the day Santiago was murdered. I think that the narrator included this because the answers varied so much. Many said it was sunny, while others contrasted this by saying it was rainy, or Christmas weather. I agree with your analysis that the narrator did this to show how it is difficult to find the exact truth, and that everyone’s memories will be different. I think this is important to remember throughout this book because there are several things we never really have an exact answer of. Like whether or not Santiago took Angela’s virginity. These unimportant contrasting details play up this theme of not always knowing the truth.
In Garcia Márquez’s book, Chronicle of a Death Foretold, one main plot is exploited through various points of view. The book’s main premise is the assassination of Santiago Nasar and how his life and death contributed with the various narrators within the chapters as the book progresses. A theme present in the first chapter and basically throughout the book, is the theme of secrecy. When the narrator talks about his sister and says, “She seemed to have secret threads of communication with the other people in town, especially those her age, and sometimes she would surprise us with news sso ahead of its time that she could only have known it through powers of divination” (Márquez 20), as this first reveals the hidden communication methods this community of people used to transfer rumors. This is critical in the book because this allows the book to build tension within its plot of how, and when Santi will be killed. The first chapter constantly keeps the reader in that suspense feel because of how unsure everybody is about the situation and how the whole assassination actually played out. It is a great introduction to the book because it formats in a very unique way of telling the plot immediately out of the gate and then slowly unveiling it through rumors and secrets. The notion of secrecy is also present in the beginnings of the plot because the plot basically originated from a secret; the secret of Angela losing her virginity.
I really like your plot analysis of the book. I like your quote to explain the communication that the small town had with each other, so a rumor such as a murder would spread very quickly. I think you should have also added the psychological "bystander effect", as it plays a large part in the whole secrecy theme. Most of the secondary characters had pretty lame excuses and motives to have Nasar killed, which is emphasized in the first chapter. But overall, I like how you analyze the theme of secrecy and how it connects to the main plot of Angela losing her virginity out of wedlock.
In the second chapter, Gabriel Garcia Marquez explores the gender roles placed on women and girls in their marriage and in childhood. He also shows how a culture reacts to wealth and prestige. When Bayardo comes to this town, he is seen as a god, rich and beautiful. When he ses Angela for the first time, he does not even speak with her, just decides that he will marry her. He has to ask a landlady who she was, and when he realized that she was, “well-named,” he asked the woman to, “remind [him] that [he is] going to marry her” (31). This shows how men of high stature can simply chose their wife and there is nothing that the woman can do to refuse it. The Vicario, “brothers were brought up to be men,” and, “the girls had been reared to get married” (34). There was no question of individuality or an option of not getting married, it was a woman’s way to live off of the wealth of her husband, which is why it is quite sceptical of why she did not want to marry Bayardo. When Angela says that she does not want to marry because, “of a lack of love,” her mother simply responds with, “love can be learned” (38). This shows how her mother simply wanted wealth and did not truly care about Angela, just the outcome of the marriage. This is also seen when Bayardo returns Angela because of her not being a widow, her mother beats her for two hours. This was to a point where Angela thought that her mother, “was going to kill,” her because of her actions”(52). However, learned earlier, it was not out of her own will that she was no longer a virgin. When another had, “dissuaded her from her good intentions,” promising that, “almost all women lost their virginity in childhood accidents,” she gave in at an early age and was abducted(42). This was not uncommon for young women, and they had to keep this hidden, hoping for a husband that would graciously overlook this with his own problems. However, this crime, was very severe, and had to be avenged, so this is why the death of Santiago took place.
I also noticed the large amount of inequality between men and women in this book. Marquez writes, “The brothers were brought up as men. The girls had been reared to get married” (31). You included this quote in your analysis, and I also wrote about this quote. I think that this is one of the most important quotes in the book because it really explains the gender inequality. This quote shows how a man’s only job was to be a man. This was enough because men were so powerful, and didn’t need to do more than be the man of a family. Men at this time were in charge of their wives and children, and even had the power to choose who they were going to marry. The woman had little to no voice in the decision. The second part of the quote emphasizes women’s little power at the time. A woman was raised with the intentions that she would be married off, and that was all. She would become a housewife and put her husband and children’s needs before hers. Overall, we had similar interpretations of this quote, and noticed the gender inequality that is present.
While reading through the second chapter, in my eyes, there was an undeniable connection and similarity with this novel and the play Taming of the Shrew. Within the play Taming of the Shrew, the marriage between Petruchio and Katherine was very forced and arranged by Katherine’s father because he had all the qualities that one would need to sustain such a high social and economic status during the time period. Meaning, Petruchio had money, power, and authority which is all that really mattered making him a “perfect” match for Katherine in her father’s eyes. Bayardo San Roman is now the Petruchio of Chronicle of a Death Foretold. He is the man of the novel that has the money, power, authority, and attractiveness over people of the city while taking into account that his father sustains a large amount of power as well; much like Petruchio and his father. Bayardo San Roman wants to marry Angela Vicario, and although not compatable and the marriage lasts a very limited amount of time, it was arranged as well by each other their parents due to the materialistic side of each family. In other words, the marriage was not based on love or compatibility, rather how much money Bayardo had compared to Angela’s family and his authority. This also greatly brings up the fact and idea of male dominance over women as well; since Angela did not greatly have a choice on whether or not she wanted to marry Bayardo. Being the woman of the relationship Angela had little to no authority and was not able to make a decision on her own bringing along the theme, one that has been very popular within the past books, of male dominance. Quickly before the two begin the journey into their relationship, Bayardo attempts to buy a house from a widower at the top of the hill, the most beautiful house of the city. The house contains all highly valuable items that remind the widower of his passed wife, counting the whole house itself, Bayardo just tries to buy off the man without any consideration on what each item means to the man. All he cares about is money rather love, another big similarity with Petruchio in The Taming of the Shrew. This representing the theme of money and power over love and affection.
The second chapter in “Chronicle of a Death Foretold” explores the cultural traditions of the time period in the novel. When Bayardo San Román comes to the little town, his mysterious figure and extreme wealth make it apparent that he has the power to do as he pleases and choose whomever he wishes to marry. The town discovers he has his sight set on Angela Vicario and after the Vicario’s meet his family, they are highly in favor of Bayardo marrying Angela. He also wins the approval of the Vicarios by showering Angela with expensive gifts when courting her. He never actually talks with her or dates her. This implies that he is interested in her because of her looks more than her personality. This leads to the portrayal of gender roles of that time. There is a clear difference between what is acceptable of women and men in the novel. The women must remain pure before marriage and after marriage she must remain faithful to her husband. The men could go about doing what they wanted to do. When it is revealed that Angela Vicario is not a virgin, her husband leaves her and her mother beats her almost to death. In contrast, the narrator reveals that he had just gotten engaged, yet he still sleeps with María Alejandrina Cervantes and is not reprimanded for his lack of fidelity in the slightest. Angela Vicario is forced to marry Bayardo even though she does not love him. “The girls had been reared to get married” in the culture of this time, the women could only improve their lives by marrying a wealthy husband (Márquez 31). The Vicario’s mother took advantage of gender roles and raised her daughters to be homemakers and suffer in silence. This allows them to be perfect, stereotypical wives.
Chapter three of “Chronicle of a Death Foretold” portrays a theme of honor and explores the complexities of this concept. ““We killed him openly,” Pedro Vicario said, “but we’re innocent.” “Perhaps before God,” said Father Amador. “Before God and before men,” Pablo Vicario said. “It was a matter of honor”” the twins and other townspeople believe that honor justifies the murder of Santiago Nasar (Márquez 49). In Catholic societies during this time, honor, purity, and fidelity were very important concepts and moral traits. Those without honor became outcasts in society. When a person lost his/her honor, it was very difficult to regain it. If honor was to be restored, the punishment for the person who created the dishonor had to equal to the crime which caused the loss of honor. In Angela’s case, she has greatly dishonored her family and herself. Again, many people in the town did not try to stop the Vicario brothers because killing Santiago Nasar was seen as a punishment fit for his alleged crime, taking Angela’s virginity. His death is portrayed as a reasonable retribution for defiling an unmarried woman, which shows the severity of the crime. It also shows the large negative impact that action has on the woman’s life. She is unable to marry well, which was a woman’s only way to progress her social status. Another notable fact about the murder is the difference in the class of Santiago and Pedro and Pablo. Santiago’s character represents the upper class and how those with wealth had power and could do as they wished. The Vicario’s, like many of the other townspeople, were poorer and possibly envied Santiago’s fortune. Again, the upper class had power because they had wealth. Committing a crime against a wealthy person is worse than committing a crime against a poor person. Either way the criminal will be punished, but the class of the criminal and the class of the victim changes the length and severity of the punishment. Despite all this, the Vicario brothers still killed Santiago. This shows the importance of maintaining one’s honor at all costs in the society they live in.
In the second chapter, Bayardo San Roman is introduced and characterized. He is described as honest and charming and a good man and well liked by many, as well as incredibly rich. His family’s power and wealth is what gives him the influence to be able to marry Angela Vicario without much protest from anyone besides the bride herself. With his great sum of money, Bayardo San Roman had bought every single ticket for a raffle just to impress her, as well as a widower’s treasured home and an extravagant wedding. Being able to spend so much money so easily as marry just as quickly points to him being a rather shallow person, marrying just for the sake of it, and not for love, but still convincing everyone around him of how genuine he is. The narrator explains, "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 court her, but had bewitched the family with his charm… The parents’ decisive argument was that a family dignified by modest means had no right to disdain that prize of destiny. 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.’” (37-38) This is reflective of the culture of the time; Angela Vicario had to marry someone she didn’t care for because her family demanded it and because the groom’s family was rich and powerful. Bayardo San Roman received his bride rather like an object that he fancied; once he found out it was defective, he rejected it and returned it.
Throughout the book Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Márquez writes about death in every chapter: the death of Santiago Nasar. Specifically in chapter two, Márquez uses irony and foreshadowing to reveal the theme that death is something that happens to everyone eventually (in this case, Santiago Nasar). Márquez writes, “Santiago Nasar had often told me that the smell of closed-in flowers had an immediate relation to death for him, and that day he repeated it to me as we went into the church” (Márquez 47). In this part of the book, Santiago is going to the wedding of Angela Vicario and Bayardo San Román in a church. It is very ironic that Santiago would say something about death when little does he know he is going to be murdered within the next 24 hours. It is even more ironic that he is saying this statement at the wedding of Angela Vicario: the sister of the murderers. This comment that he makes foreshadows that he will in fact be killed. Later in the chapter, after Angela’s mother beats her, she says, “I felt as if the drowsiness of death had finally been lifted from me” (52-53). This statement is also very ironic because death is going to be more prevalent in her life than ever from this moment forward. Right after she says this, her brothers ask her who took away her virginity and when she replies “Santiago Nasar,” the preparation to kill him will begin for the Vicario twins. Another way this quote could be interpreted is that the weight of death is being lifted from her, but being given to someone else; Angela is no longer going to suffer her mother’s beatings, but it will be Santiago who ultimately pays.
By the end of chapter 3 it is clear that “there had never been a death more foretold” (57) than that of Santiago Nasar. In the previous chapter, even though it was Angela Vicario’s own mother who beat her senseless, she placed the blame on Santiago Nasar for taking her virginity and causing her to be returned by her husband, which was a great loss of honor. This can be connected to the ideals of marianismo and machismo, where a woman’s value was placed entirely in her virginity and purity and men had to defend that honor to the point of killing someone. This sets off the entire chain of events resulting in Santiago Nasar’s death, which many of the characters that the narrator speaks to believe that the Vicario brothers were completely justified in killing him. Pablo Vicario’s fiancée, Prudentia Cotes, said that “’I knew what they were up to…and I didn’t only agree, I never would have married him if he hadn’t done what a man should do” (72). She is one of the fewer people who believed that honor was a good reason; most of the other people in the town simply didn’t believe that the brothers, who were known to be such good people that they would never kill anyone, and they were only drunk as they shouted to the whole town that they were going to kill Santiago Nasar. This differentiates his death from the death of Kitty Genovese in that the attack was provoked and everyone knew about it beforehand, so much so that it is as if he deserved to die for what he had done. Also, where Genovese’s killer showed no motive or remorse, the Vicario brothers “had done much more than could be imagined to have someone to stop them from killing him, and they had failed” (56). They had seemed to be trying to delay it, too, and had a lot to drink while they waited for him in Clotilde Armenta’s store; the narrator also mentions that killing Santiago Nasar could have been made easier by the fact that the brothers slaughtered hogs, but the words of the other butcherers suggest that that may not entirely be the case. Either way, “the twins declared at the end of the trial that they would have done it again a thousand times for the same reason.” (55)
You insights really reflect my notion that honor is so powerful in this society that it can drive people to commit immoral crimes like murder. This book is fascinating int that fact that the entire plot revolves around two men committing an immoral act, yet not doing it would have been against their morals. It's even more ironic that they are thought to be two of the nicest people in the town. These corrupted morals have the consequence of making the twins feel very guilty, as seen in the next chapter, as the narrator states, "Pablo Vicario told me without without any effort: 'It was like being awake twice over.’"(90). By being awake “twice over”, Pablo meant that he was not only awake in a literal sense and couldn’t sleep, but he was also mentally awakened to the crime he committed, reflecting how the twins were trapped in a moral dilemma.
In Chapter three of Chronicles of a Death Foretold, the weather seems to mirror a certain aspect of the book. Different people say that the weather was different on the day of Santiago Nassar’s death. This directly reflects the uncertainties and confusion throughout the book. Through all of the interpretations of that day, there are some things that don’t add up right. Colonel Lázaro Aponte says, “I can remember with certainty that it was almost 5 o’clock and it was beginning to rain” (Márquez 64). This certainty that he has is very odd considering that others believed the weather to be different. This reveals the theme of how it is very difficult to come to conclusions based on memories. Later in the book Pablo Vicario says, “It was raining” (70). Referring to that same time, the one who kills Santiago has a different memory of the weather than someone much less involved in the crime. Immediately after that his twin brother says, “Just the opposite, there was a sea wind and you could still count the stars with your fingers” (71). Both Pablo and Pedro were together and did the same things that whole day, so isn’t a bit odd that they both have very certain memories on what the weather was like? It is impossible for al three of these weather conditions to have occurred at the same exact time, so that brings us to the question of who is right? When dealing with a crime, there are so many interpretations and it is hard to distinguish what is right and what is a false memorization.
I completely agree with your conclusions based on the different memories people have on the weather during the crime, which also reminds me of a quote in chapter 1, in which the narrator states how he is "trying to put the broken mirror of memory back together from so many scattered shards." (6). This quote made me think, therefore, how the narration of the book, and the information given to use is all coming from the point of view of the narrator. Therefore, there must be some error and misinterpretations, since, not only is he compiling information from an event that occurred 27 years ago, but he was the best friend of the victim.
Chapter two in the story introduces a few cases of situational irony into the story. Bayardo San Roman is a good example of irony. He comes in search of the perfect wife, and he thinks he finds the ideal wife in Angela Vicario. However, of all wives he could have chosen, he chose the one who lied about her virginity. This is ironic because he was convinced that he would find the perfect bride, yet Angela was far from it. Angela Vicario also shows this example of situational irony as she trains her entire life for the sole purpose of being the perfect wife. She learns all the major skills of being a good housewife and how to take care of her husband, becoming skilled at things such as sewing and ironing. Becoming the perfect wife took a lot of hard work and effort, so one would believe that this would pay off for her in the end with a good husband as she would get to choose whoever she wanted. However, the irony comes in that when she gets ready to marry, she is exposed as far from perfect. Bayardo San Roman finds out that her virginity has been taken and that he has been lied to this whole time. This means Angela, the perfect wife, is unfit for marriage and is not an ideal wife.
In the third chapter of the story, the sexist and patriarchal norms of this society are showcased through the double standards put on male and female virginity. It is common for men to lose their virginities and not face consequences, many of them sleeping with prostitutes often, yet value is placed on the virginity of a woman. This double standard is present throughout the book. The common theme in the book is that men sleep with prostitutes while women are meant to be pure. Prostitutes are a part of the life of the majority of men around the town, even going as far as to be provided to men at weddings. If these roles were flipped, the situation would be blasphemous, and yet it is considered normal in this patriarchal society. Angela is returned to her mother for not being pure in this chapter and is punished by her for a crime committed by almost every man in society. The goal set by the author for this double standard is to make the reader look at what being pure actually is, and if losing one’s virginity truly makes one not pure. The reader should look at women or humans as a whole instead of focusing on one trait when looking at purity in a person.
I completely agree with your analysis of chapter 3 about the gender roles present in this book's setting. Like you said, this concept of women being pristine and like Virgin Mary before marriage basically was the cause and main concept of the story line and plot of the book. The entirety of the book revolves around this concept and is ironic because the book punishes the reverse concept. In the book when Angela was found not a virgin because of Santi, Santi is the one being ultimately punished with his life, while Angela just gets beat by her mother. This is seen as ironic because usually, the man has no punishment for sleeping with a women. However, in this case, due to family superiority and social conflicts, the man ends up being the center of attention and killed for his actions.
So, in chapter three this is from the perspective of mostly the two brothers in the beginning. The two brothers now must avenge their sister as a matter of dignity and kill the one who allegedly took away her virginity. To the brothers, they saw this as an innocent crime and that it was justified by being, “a matter of honor” (56). They were only concerned about how it had reflected poorly on their family and it was not seen as a crime to them in that society. Although they did end up going to jail for three years after the death, it was completely justified and even endorsed. When they stop in at Pablo’s fiancee’s home, she said that she knew what they were going to do, “and don't only agree, [but she] never would have married him if he hadn’t done what a man should do”(72). This shows that it was not a matter of life or death to them, but as raised to be men(34) it was their duty to simply protect the women around them. This quality was sought after by the brothers’ fiancee and she waited for him until he got out of jail to marry him. Marquez inserts the interaction with the fiancee to show how some people in that culture even endorsed this crime. Through the symbol of weather, and how people perceived the day showed what their inward reaction to the situation was. When Santiago was with the narrator and his brother, they stated how, “it hadn’t rained,” and how it was still just the beginning of the day of Santiago’s death(77). This shows the obliviousness of some people and how they neither thought the day was wonderful or not, just a normal day until the death. However, the brothers had commented on how it had been a nice day because they found nothing wrong with committing this crime.
While reading the third chapter in the novel, Chronicle of the Death Foretold, by Gabriel Garcia Marquez, I noticed, and found it very unusual and strange, how causally the people of the city found it when the Vicario brothers announced that they had decided to murder Santiago Nasar. Within the first few pages of the chapter, the plot takes place in the church where the two brothers were confessing their sins and Father Amador thought nothing of this horrid act of crime. He believed it was an act “before God,” and was one that was easily forgivable. Next, found on page fifty two, the narrator states, “‘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.” And lastly, found on page fifty four the narrator says, “It was such a spontaneous answer that she couldn't believe she’d heard right,” speaking of the reaction Clotilde Armenta had after learning of the news from the brothers that they were going to kill the man. These reactions, I believe, greatly influence the time period that the book was written in. Today, if one were to hear of the fact and plan of another wanting to murder one, they would most likely immediately report the possible crime, if mentally sain. Although, within the play people account for their, what seems to be, safe and ‘well-founded’ reputation the two brothers had and forgot about the fact that they wanted to take one’s life. Many years ago, crime was much higher than today and what was thought of as a crime was most likely far different as well. When thinking about our law and legal system each American citizen must abide by, one, no matter how well-founded their reputation was, would not easily be caught planning on murdering one. Although, in the novel the two twins publicize their plan to almost the whole city and no one thinks twice of it. This supports the idea that this novel is supposed to take place long ago just with this little difference in culture.
In the second chapter of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Marquez expresses a lot of various themes and third world inspirations in her writing. The main and most noticeable theme shown in the chapter is the idea of gender roles. She continually displays the stereotypical attributes of being a woman in the setting of Colombia. She uses quotes such as, “They were perfect. Any man will be happy with them because they’ve been raised to suffer” (GM, 31), to identify how big of a social gap there was between the men and women in families. Especially for two characters of Angela and Bayardo because Bayardo is from a rich and well-known family, while Angela is from a poor and deficient family. She is forced to marry him due to his popular and rich family, and is a very abusive and aggressive person. This is known through Marquez’s description of his background and family. While on the subject, family is also a huge part of the novel, which gets introduced in this chapter. The family honor each family shows is present and really reflects culture and a person’s growth into their community. A quote said about Angela’s mom really shows this as it 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 that she still existed” (GM, 31), which deeply connects with the reader because it explains how she is inexistent because of how much she works for her family.
In the third chapter of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Marquez discusses and explores the subject of prostitution and the stereotype of objectifying women. He displays how the society views maternal affairs and conflicts. The chapter also specifically expresses the value placed on a female's virginity and how it could impact relationships within a family and the community. Maria Alejandrina Cervantes is mentioned repeatedly throughout the chapter because she is continually objectified and is referenced as things such as “the most serviceable in bed,” and is described as “the most elegant and the most tender woman I have ever known” (GM, 34). These phrases and terms describes clearly how the difference in manners and attitude towards the women in their community in general is compared to the males. Maria is later then blamed that “it was she who did away with my generation’s virginity” (65), and is again referencing the men and their generation. The idea of pristinity linked to abstaining from premarital sex is obviously only applicable to women in this society. Angela is returned from her husband’s bed and beaten nearly to death by her mother for committing the same “wrongs” that were completely acceptable when committed by the men. Santiago Nasar and Pablo Vicario are both described as having premarital sex and engaging in frequent sexual relations with the prostitutes of the town. Prostitutes are even provided as a service at the wedding, and it described how “They’d been working without cease for three days, first taking care of the guests of honor in secret then turned loose, the doors wide open for those of us still unsated by the wedding bash” (64). This compares the girls to wedding entertainment to be utilized when one was bored.
In chapter 4, the part about Santiago Nasar’s corpse is a continuation of the townsfolk’s sentiment towards him still. The poorly performed autopsy seemed rather unnecessary, given that they knew who had committed the crime and the victim had obviously died because of numerous stab wounds, and the narrator said that afterwards “they gave us back a completely different body”, with most of it destroyed beyond recognition (88). Then “the empty shell, stuffed with rags and quicklime and sewed up crudely with coarse twine and baling needles, was on the point of falling apart when we put it into the new coffin with its silk quilt lining” shows how little people cared even then, when Santiago Nasar’s guts had been carved out the remains a gross imitation of a person (88). Earlier in the chapter, the priest had said that “it was as if we killed him all over again after he was dead” (83). This kind of treatment towards a dead body seems disrespectful, intentional or not, because of the lack of skill of the people doing the autopsy. Because of the incredibly specific description of Santiago Nasar’s wounds that the narrator provides, it gives the reader a slight feeling of revulsion from the graphicness, even through the narrator’s tone of clinical detachment. The dogs in the house also wanted to eat Santiago Nasar’s guts, and would not stop howling – this is another sign of the townsfolk’s attitude towards his death, remaining rather passive and most of them feeling it was right for Santiago Nasar to die in revenge for Angela Vicario’s honor. However, the brothers were affected by his death – they could not sleep, and became ill – the smell of death clung to them relentlessly like the blood that stained their hands in the name of honor.
In chapter five, the exact events on the day of Santiago Nasar’s death are finally known. Many of the characters are still haunted by the event: “The cocks of dawn would catch us trying to give order to the chain of many chance events that had made absurdity possible, and it was obvious that we weren’t doing it from an urge to clear up mysteries but because none of us could go on living without an exact knowledge of the place and mission assigned to us by fate” (113). The role of fate in magical realism is shown here, with the “chain of many chance events” and the “place and mission assigned to us by fate” in developing the idea that Santiago Nasar’s death was foretold by fate and thus unavoidable. However “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, giving access only to those who are part of the drama”, indicating that the townspeople are still much in the same mindset of passiveness regarding the murder, using honor as a reason to stand by and do nothing, reducing the entire situation to nothing more than a “drama” (114). Despite Angela Vicario’s unwavering statement that Santiago Nasar was the one who violated her honor, evidence began to show in favor of the opposite: “when he finally learned at the last moment that the Vicario brothers were waiting for him to kill him, his reaction was not one of panic, as has so often been said, but rather the bewilderment of innocence” (118). Cristo Bedoya and Yamil Shaium were the only ones who actively tried to help Santiago Nasar, but to no avail, because no one could find him – he somehow, impossibly, went into his fiancée’s house without anyone noticing, which could be another instance of fate dooming him to die. His confusion as he tried to find his way home, followed by the voices of the townspeople shouting at him, seems to further prove his innocence because he didn’t know why they were going to kill him. His own mother absolved herself of blame for locking the front door, ultimately sealing her son’s fate – she believed it was Divina Flor’s fault for telling her something that wasn’t true. The last few pages, laden with the surrealism of Santiago Nasar walking home in the morning light, holding his guts in his hand, is the greatest example of the magic in magical realism.
At this point in time, in chapter four, Santiago has officially been murdered by the Vicario brothers and the mood and tone within the town after the event has completely changed. Specifically focusing on the Vicario brothers and the impact the murder had on the two men. After the murder, the aspect and idea of karma comes into great perspective. These two men killed and took the life of an innocent man based off rumor and now it’s as if the world is out to get them due to their wrongdoings and major ethical mistakes they have made. “The pain in his groin had reached his throat, his urine was shut off, and he suffered the frightful certainty that he wouldn't sleep ever again for the rest of his life.” (80) “Pablo Vicario, for his apart, ate a little bit of everything they brought him, and fifteen minutes later unloosed a pestilential diarrhea. At six in the afternoon… the mayor was summoned urgently because Pedro Vicario was convinced that his brother had been poisoned.” (80) Both brothers are experience immense pain and toles on their bodies and of course it all occurs after the murder of Santiago Nasar. Its as if its their ‘faith’ or karma coming back to haunt them from what they have done. Now although there are many others to blame for the lose of Santiago Nasar, since almost every towns person knew of his future death, but did nothing to stop the two, each brother still takes much more responsibility and blame since they were the two to actually execute the killing of Santiago Nasar. The karma is the fact that their bodies are now taking the toll for what has happened as if they are dying themselves.
In chapter four of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, the theme of that everything is predetermined is continued. With this, there are aspects of fate and karma seen throughout this chapter. Throughout the whole book, fate plays a role in Santiago’s death, but fate also plays a role in the Vicario brothers’ punishments. After the autopsy of Santiago Nasar, Dr. Dionisio Iguarán says, “he only had a few years of life left to him in any case” (87). He is saying that Santiago would have died soon even if it weren’t for him being murdered. This shows how his death was predetermined no matter the circumstances. Later in the chapter when the Vicario brothers are in jail, Márquez writes, “The pain in his groin had reached his throat, his urine was shut off, and he suffered the frightful certainty that he wouldn’t ever sleep again for the rest of his life” (92). Pedro Vicario was suffering from insomnia. This problem can be tied back to the idea of karma; he murdered someone, so the universe is punishing him in return. Not only is Pedro suffering, Pablo is too. Márquez writes, “Pablo Vicario, for his part, ate a little bit of everything they brought him, and fifteen minutes later unloosed a pestilential diarrhea” (92). Like his brother, Pablo helped murder Santiago and is therefore being punished for his wrongdoing by a horrible stomach issue. The Vicario brothers weren’t punished enough for their atrocity, so the universe had to punish them to create balance of good and bad.
I definitley agree with your interpretation of the text. In my blog post I also examined the karma. You could further support this by tying the punishments back into the seven deadly sins to show how religion is related. Also the Vicario brothers did suffer after committing the murder. They both had the stench of Santiago on them and had to deal with all of their stomach problems while in jail. And to add to that both brothers went onto doing risky jobs a while later (leading to the death of one).. do you think this is how the universe could have punished them?
Magical realism is displayed in chapter five of Chronicle of a Death Foretold. Throughout the whole novel, Márquez uses aspects of magical realism to tell the story of the murder of Santiago Nasar. Márquez ends the book with a couple unrealistic aspects to tie the story together. After Santiago learns that he is going to be murdered by the Vicario brothers, Márquez writes, “Santiago Nasar went backward and forward several times, baffled by hearing so many voices at the same time” (Márquez 136). This is an example of magical realism because the narrator cannot actually know what Santiago is feeling or thinking. Santiago may have appeared “baffled” but the narrator cannot know for sure that he was “baffled by hearing so many voices at the same time.” It is as if the narrator is inside Santiago’s mind, explaining how he feels. Also, later in the chapter after Santiago had been attacked by the Vicario brothers, Márquez writes, “they were sitting down to breakfast when they saw Santiago Nasar enter, soaked in blood and carrying the roots of his entrails in his hands” (Márquez 142). After being stabbed so many times to the point where his intestines have come out of his body, it seems very unrealistic that Santiago is walking around with his guts in his hands still very much alive. It is almost as if Santiago is a God or Saint to still be alive and functioning holding his body parts. Even though this story is very realistic, there are aspects like these two that give it a magical and fictional feel.
I heavily agree on your analysis and topics you discussed in chapter 5 about magical realism and how Marquez uses the illusional aspects to create a deeper and more thoughtful tone for the reader. Marquez repeatedly and effectively uses this technique to create an uneasy and more complex mood within the reader while they are reading this because all the unrealistic details supports the main plot and how the storyline plays out. I mostly agree on your analysis about Santi’s descriptions used by Marquez to create a fictional feel, however, I thought these uses of magical realism actually supports the realistic concepts and events taken place because it gives the reader an indescribable feeling that somehow feels relatable. It is very unique, but I feel like it it used very effectively by Marquez.
Chapter four portrays the events after Santiago Nasar’s murder. His body is discretely compared to that of a butchered animal. ““Help me,” she shouted to me. “What they want is to eat his guts”” the dogs cannot tell the difference between animal entrails and their master’s entrails (Márquez 73). The body is saved from being destroyed by the dogs, but is still massacred by the people performing the autopsy. The entrails the dogs would have eaten are thrown in the trash. Part of the description of the body compares the death to “a stigma of the crucified Christ” (75). This suggests that Santiago’s death was possibly a sacrifice for the sins of the community. The town is plagued with Santiago’s sent suggesting that the smell symbolizes the guilt felt by all because everyone failed to prevent the murder of Nasar, who may or may not have been innocent. The theme of sexism is also portrayed through the town’s reaction to the incident. Angela has been beaten by her mother, abandoned by her husband and has lost her honor. Still Bayardo is seen as the ultimate victim of the whole thing because he lost his wife. Angela has lost far more and yet many fail to pity her like they pity Bayardo. The readers also discover Angela Vicario’s new obsession with Bayardo San Roman after he leaves her. She sends nearly two thousand letters to him, yet he never reads any of them. This indicates the ritualistic nature of romantic love in their society. The content of the letters are less important than the fact that Angela wrote them and Bayardo received them. This seems to relate the two through the idea of courtship. Initially, he was buying her gifts as a method of courting her. Now she attempts to get him back by writing him letters. Bayardo underscores their relationship by placing more symbolic importance on the letters than the content, which, again, makes their relationship ritualistic.
I completely agree with your analysis. I never thought about the theme of sexism and how it is portrayed in this chapter with Angela and Bayardo San Roman. I think your analysis of the quote about Christ is very accurate like when you said that it suggests that Santiago’s death was a sacrifice for the sins of the town. In my blog I discussed how karma and fate were the reasons why Santiago died and were also the reasons why the Vicario brothers had health issues in jail. I agree more with your interpretation explaining the reason for Santiago’s death. It’s almost like he is receiving the karma from things that his community did wrong.
After reading chapter five, I am very disgusted with the details of the murder, to begin with. I feel as if the details of the murder were not included within the whole novel or chapter five, there would be a great element missing since the whole story revolves around the murder of Santiago Nasar. The topic that I personally wanted to focus on though was the psychological aspect of Santiago Nasar when hearing about his own future murder. Personally, if the whole town of people I lived in informed me on the fact that two men were preparing to murder me in the midst of minutes, terrified would be an understatement. One can effortlessly understand the state of overwhelmingness that Santiago was under after hearing about his future death as the whole town screams and yells at him as to what he should do or where he should go to avoid the Vicario brothers. I question though what was running through Santiago’s head at this time. Was he fearful, was he confused, or was he in a state of clear disbelievement? Found on page 115, the narrator writes, “They began to shout at him from every side, and Santiago Nasar went backward and forward several times, baffled by hearing so many voices at the same time.” From that specific quote, the reader can enfer how confused and conflicted he was. Although I question how he still ended up deciding to choose to not follow what every single town person was saying, and decided to enter his home. What made him decide to walk himself to his own death and why did he not try to contact authorities or police in efforts to protect himself? There are many questions that run through my head when thinking about Santiago’s psychological state at this point in time that one can sadly only use a very educated guess on.
I found your analysis very interesting. When I look at this quote I think about the community aspect of his death. A normal person's reaction to seeing Santiago in the streets would be to hide him in your house, or something like that. But instead, the crowd of people just yells at him. They yell at him so much that he doesn't even understand what's going on. And no one makes a move to help him get to his own home safely. Even if they thought they were helping, all they were doing was confusing him and not one person had the idea to actually physically help him. Talking about psychology though, when I read just this quote I instantly think of someone with a mental disability, like schizophrenia because it says "[He was] hearing so many voices at the same time" and that is a trait for people with psychosis. Lastly, to answer your question: what made him decide to walk to his own death? My idea was that him walking to his own death was Marquez reiterating that the death of Santiago was fate and no matter what he did he was going to die anyways.
Throughout the novel, many of the events leading to Santiago Nasar’s murder are attributed to fate. The fifth chapter portrays the actual minutes before and during his death. “The people had stationed themselves on the square the way they did on parade days” this portrays that the townspeople believed they were spectators and not actors in the events of the murder (Márquez 115). The narrator obscures his role by acknowledging the fact that he, like everybody else in the town, is not blameless. The events leading to the murder are portrayed as coincidental and destined, yet many still feel guilty for their lack of action in an easily preventable incident. The townspeople are seen as observers, powerless forces that cannot stop the inevitable. The Colonel is a figure that represents power, yet he fails to prevent the murder because he is checking on a dominoes game. While it appears that Márquez is attempting to attribute the events to fate, he portrays that the townspeople wish to blame fate, but cannot successfully do so. Many people developed strange afflictions after hearing of Santiago’s death which suggests the town feels guilty for not preventing it. The suffering of the town is a subconscious attempt to make amends for their sins (not stopping the crime). In the end, Divina Flor has a vision of Santiago coming into the house carrying flowers. This vision foreshadows Santiago entering the house with his entrails in his hands. Many could have prevented the death, yet the vision suggests that is was unavoidable. Márquez uses this contrast to create the magical realism in the novel. He also used surrealism to portray Santiago, after he has been stabbed, to create the magical effect. “Then he went into his house through the back door that had been open since six and fell on his face in the kitchen” this ends the magical effect with the last portrayal of reality, Santiago’s death (120).
I completely agree with your analysis. However, could you maybe elaborate more on the concept of fate? How was Santiago necessarily a victim to this? Why is it that fate is the one to blame for the tragedy? Overall, I think your analysis, especially when you mention the visions people are having before his death. :)
Hey! Chapter four starts out with the Santiago once again being butchered like an animal. This being foretold in the beginning when the dogs were waiting for the rabbits innards, now want their masters to feast on. However, the dogs are killed and Santiago's innards end up being tossed in the garbage pail anyways(88). The referral to Santiago’s hand would being a, “stigma of the crucified Christ,” once again shows how he had died for the sins of the community(87). This is an analogy to the death of Christ because Santiago is portrayed to have done nothing wrong. Allso near the end of this chapter, the narrator infers that Angela had said Santiago because she thought her brothers, “would never dare go up against him,” because of his wealth(104). Chapter four also i noticed has many references to magical realism. The fact that everything smelled of Santiago, even though he had not been near thers, show how reality was mixed with fantasy(90). Another example is Xius’ thinking that the disappearing items from his house were because his dead wife was taking them(100). This also shows how his reality and dream likeness is not clear where one stops and the other starts. The last half of this chapter tells of Angela and her life after her wedding night. How her, “ mother had tried to burry her alive,” and how her mother had made it so that, “Angela die[d] in life” (101, 103). Angela revealed that she had been truthful to Bayardo and had not wanted to do what her friends had suggested and trick Bayardo into thinking she was a virgin. This shows how women tried at all costs to keep their virginity or a secret if they had lost it. Marquez depicts Angels as “becom[ing] a virgin again just for him” and continued writing him letters for 12 years(109). This shows persistence and that a woman has to have a man to succeed. If she didn't need a man she would have continued living without giving another thought. Bayardo finally returns at the end, with more than 2000 unopened letters(111), symbolizing that he didn't need words, but only her persistence to make him come back.
So in the last Chapter I was really hit by how awful Santiago’s death was. I found that the gruesome facts just made the death so much worse and Santiago’s confusion just added to how terrible it was. When Nahir Miguel tells Santiago that, “the Vicario brothers were looking for him to kill him,” Santiago did not have and expression of fear, but that of confusion(135). This was very eye opening that he was confused and that his first reaction was to go out into the streets unarmed knowing he would be killed. Also, another report said that his response was not that of panic, “but rather the bewilderment of innocence”(118). His reaction showed once again that he had not commited this crime against Angela and was being framed for it. A symbol of this framing is when the brothers were killing Santiago. Pedro, after already stabbing him three times, acknowledged, “that the knife kept coming out clean”(139), symbolizing that Santiago was innocent and had done nothing wrong to deserve this kind of death. Santiago not seeming to bleed, juxtaposed with the terrible murder from the brothers suggests he had never lost his purity. This is also another reference to magical realism because there was probably bloo on the knife, but Pedro may have not been thinking in the real world and not been in his right mind. The uncertainty in this book is overwhelming. I found that when the judge was reviewing the papers and, “the marginal notes...seemed to be written in blood,” this not only symbolized how gruesome the event was, but also how much could have been changed(116). This being said, the red would be like corrections made in the document, so people never knew what had actually happened or if it was just changed from the original reports. This parallels Santiago’s confusion and how aspect were not as clear as they once were and they will never truly be resolved.
Your analysis greatly helped my understanding of the chapter and the book in general. It gave me some food for thought because of how you expressed the non-stereotypical view of the plot. Your idea of Angela's virginity being a mystery and that the Santi might not have actually taken it was very informative. I never thought about this, and the magical realism in the description of the murder is great analysis. Another point that I thought about after reading this blog was the idea that maybe Angela was abused by her father and that she was so embarrassed that she never shared her story.
In chapter four of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Marquez explores the outcomes and consequences of the murder of Santi. The chapter begins with Santi’s body being buried and getting forgotten as a person because of the outrageous act he committed. However, this is the main controversy and question the entire book creates; was Santi really guilty for an act that he had no intention of doing? This is unclear throughout the book and continues to question the qualities of a person’s life within this community of people. This also stresses the value and importance of marriage and the concept of Marianismo within the Colombian culture. Marianismo is the idea and expectation of a lady before marriage. She must be pristine to the highest level before marriage or else it will show a great sign of disrespect and lack of loyalty to her husband, family, and society. Although Angela did not obey to these expectations, she was not the one who got punished most severely, Santi was. This chapter also continues to question and create the theme of life and death. This is shown with Bayardo San Roman because of how he was found in his home almost committing suicide with alcohol. However, with the help of Angela, he comes back to her years after and desires to be with her for the rest of the chapter. Angela barely gets punished for her losing her virginity throughout the book. She does get beaten by her mother in the previous chapter, but her moving to another city allows her to create a new and blank slate.
You mentioned how this chapter displays the outcomes and consequences of the murder of Santiago. Not only does Santiago and Angela suffer, but the murderers also have consequences. To better your analysis, I think that you could add how the Vicario brothers were punished because they murdered Santiago. Márquez writes, “The pain in his groin had reached his throat, his urine was shut off, and he suffered the frightful certainty that he wouldn’t ever sleep again for the rest of his life” (92). This quote is referring to Pedro and the insomnia and health issues that he suffers in jail. The murdering of Santiago causes this suffering for Pedro. It can be explained by karma; because the Vicario brothers weren’t punished enough by the justice system for their crime, the universe ultimately punishes them.
The fourth chapter of the play conveys the motif of blame throughout the story. In chapters 1-4, it was very common for the events that occurred to be seen as fate and the reader was meant to see the death of Santiago Nasar as fate or destiny. However, this was due to the fact that the events were often portrayed through the recollection of events from those involved in the story; those who could have been blamed for some of what occurred. It is said in the chapter that “They took it for granted that the other actors in the tragedy had been fulfilling with dignity, and even with a certain grandeur, their part of the destiny that life had assigned them” (96). This shows how, even in this chapter, no one wants to take responsibility for their own actions. It is now realized that many had responsibility for what happened and yet they all blame it on destiny, and do this throughout the story. Fate was just a cover-up for the mistakes made by each and every person in the story, being used as something to ease the guilt.
As talked about in my chapter four blog, there is a common theme of blame in the book, and this comes from the guilt that everyone feels for the murder of Nasar. Up until the last chapter, everyone feels they played a part and have something to feel guilty about. However, in the last chapter this changes when the reader learns of how Nasar was killed. While the reader knew he died and who did it, it is not until the end of the book that the severity of the death is revealed. It is here that it is seen that the Vicario brothers are unlikely to feel guilt over their actions. If they had any empathy for Nasar, they would not have slaughtered him in such a harsh and painful way. Their actions break the theme of guilt and blame in the book by showing two people that feel no guilt for their wrongdoing and therefore have no need to blame anyone. They clearly believe that getting revenge for their sister is more important than this man’s life, going against everything seen in the book so far.
In the final chapter of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, the narrator continues to express and question the reality of the situation. In this chapter, a more detailed and explained story of the murder was shared by Santi’s friend, who walked with him earlier the day he was killed. This chapter explains the confusion and reaction of the rumors by Santi. Santi had as much information as the reader of this book before the reader picked up this book. He said Santi was running all over the place trying to figure an explanation of the situation, but before he got the answer, he was killed. The main theme I thought this chapter most indicated was the lack of action. In this chapter, Santi is continually running back and forth trying to figure out why someone is trying to kill him, and everyone would keep telling him to do something or run. Everyone was a spectator and just watched. They all barely helped and never put action, which really displays the community of people in which this book took place in. The narrator also could not tell the difference between a spectator or a person who acts because he himself is biased to how his community acts. He is apart of the community and this brings up the question; is this normal behavior? Due to family traditions and how the parents raised their kids, this might possibly be the case.
I totally agree with you and you bring up an interesting point in questioning the social norms that are taught by the members of society. Their culture of machismo, I would definitely say played a part in the apathy of the community as they wouldn’t have found much fault in the actions of the two brothers who were just trying to avenge the harm done to their family name. This importance attached to the honor of the family would have distorted the views of the community to view such motivations with a different perspective then someone else who might say that murder is never justified, especially in these situations. Despite knowing about the impending murder, the people within Santiago Nasar’s community maintained a lack of urgency that would fit with their lack of concern with the prospect of murder.
amber mao
ReplyDeleteThe narrated events of the first chapter bear great similarities to the articles on the murder of Kitty Genovese: many people in the town knew that Santiago Nasar was going to be killed that morning, yet no one did anything about it. The first mention that someone knew that two men were waiting to kill him was about the cook, Victoria Guzman. Her reasons for hating Santiago Nasar were well explained – he had made unwanted advances on her daughter, was apparently a horrible person like his father, and was strangely shocked by feeding rabbit guts to dogs. Perhaps Divina Flor had the same internal reasons – she was frightened by him, and if he died then she wouldn’t have to live with his constant attention. The comparison in the text of his hand to that of a dead man shows how soulless the two women thought he was, no better (and maybe better off as) a rotting corpse, in contrast to the more positive descriptions of him in the context of his mother and father. Santiago Nasar even had a chance to find out about his own impending death: “Someone who was never identified had shoved an envelope under the door with a piece of paper warning Santiago Nasar that they were waiting for him to kill him, and in addition, the note revealed the place, the motive, and other quite precise details of the plot” (15). That he somehow managed to not read the note under his own door is starting to seem like a sad sort of fate, like everything was pointing towards him dying that day. A proprietress near the place of the murder saw the two men who wanted to kill him and yet did nothing – but prayed for them to wait until after the bishop left. The fact that “many of those who were on the docks knew that they were going to kill Santiago Nasar” only adds to the sense of complacency of the townspeople – if an entire town knew that someone was going to die, why did no one act? When the mother of the narrator found out, she told her husband she was going “’to warn my dear friend Placida,’ she answered. ‘It isn’t right that everybody should know that they’re going to kill her son and she the only one who doesn’t’” (25). There is something not right about the fact that instead of trying to prevent the murder from happening, she would warn her friend that her son was about to be killed. Compared with the case of Kitty Genovese, the town seems to be actively avoiding trying to keep Santiago Nasar from being killed, whereas with Genovese, the witnesses were afraid of becoming involved with the incident. This is likely for the same reason that Vicario brothers wanted to kill Santiago Nasar – their sister, a bride, wasn’t a virgin. Perhaps the whole town just wanted him to die because they felt like he deserved to be murdered. However, because of this, his death seemed more like fate than anything, with all paths pointing towards his doom – and with an entire town accepting the fact that he was already dead, there doesn’t seem to be much of a way he could have avoided it.
Throughout the first chapter there is a huge element of dramatic irony. Now it is obvious that one must take into account that there really wouldn't be a plotline or story to tell without it though. The thing about the dramatic irony is that everyone, including the audience knows that Santiago will be killed, besides his mother. His mother is the last to know of the horrific event that will occur and sadly it's far too late when she finally finds out what will happen to her son. On pages nineteen and twenty, one can find specific examples of this dramatic irony. The author writes on page nineteen, “Many of those who were on the docks knew that they were going to kill Santiago Nasar.” This quote is a perfect example of the dramatic irony as it is also proof that it is hugely within the first chapter. The quote itself is very self explanatory as it blatantly proves the point of the element of dramatic irony in the chapter. Also found on page twenty, the author writes, “In reality, my sister Margot was one of the few people who still didn’t know that they were going to kill him.” Now this is a quote that more supports the element of the dramatic irony. Dramatic irony is when the audience knows something that will occur later on in the future that characters in the novel don’t know. If Nasar’s sister were to know that he was going to be murdered, there would be no dramatic irony to the chapter, but since she has no idea, it makes the dramatic irony possible. Along with his sister not knowing, his mother had no idea as well until one finally told her, but before she knew, there was a great amount of dramatic irony. Without the dramatic irony there would be no real mystery element to the story though since his mother, most likely, would try to stop her son being murdered.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your reasons of why he died and because fate had a role in his death. Just another thought would be why Santiago was chosen for this death to occur? I find it interesting how the narrator never addresses why it was Santiago, other than that he was rich and Angela didn't think her brothers would kill Santiago. Going off of that, was it only date or was it also Angela's condemnation essentially. Although as you mentioned the letter did have information warning Santiago, I find it baffling that fate would even have no one inform Santiago of his death sooner than it happening.
DeleteIn chapter one of the novel Chronicle of a Death Foretold, the theme that everything happens for a reason and fate is evident. This novel is about the hours leading up to the death of a young man, Santiago Nasar. Almost everybody in this man’s village new that he was going to be killed, so how did he not know this atrocity was going to happen? This can be explained by fate. Santiago Nasar always used his back door and rarely his front door. Márquez writes, “Nevertheless, it was [at the front door], and not at the rear door, that the men who were going to kill him waited for Santiago Nasar, and it was through there that he went out to receive the bishop” (Márquez 11). Despite the fact that he would have to walk around the whole house, he still used the front door. This is an unfortunate fatal coincidence for Santiago. Later in the book it is explained that there was a letter written warning Santiago of his death with very specific details about how the murder would take place. Márquez writes, “The message was on the floor when Santiago Nasar left home, but he didn’t see it, nor did Divina Flor or anyone else until long after the crime had been consummated” (15). If Santiago or someone else in his household would have noticed the paper, his life could have been saved. It seems as if it was fate that he did not notice it. Both of these two events happened for a reason: to conceal Santiago Nasar’s fatal fate.
ReplyDeleteGabriel García Márquez’s “Chronicle of a Death Foretold” and the murder of Kitty Genovese are very similar. In both murder cases, the neighbors and the townspeople know the murder will happen or is happening, yet all fail to act and stop the crime. In both cases, each person explained their excuse for not helping Kitty or for not warning Santiago. Many of the details about the murder of Kitty and Santiago are unfortunate coincidences used to hint at their sad fates. Both Santiago and Kitty had to be in the right place at the right time and both had people who refused to help or warn them. The neighbors and the townspeople all assumed someone had called the police/told Santiago of the Vicario’s plan to kill him. “No one even wondered whether Santiago Nasar had been warned, because it seemed impossible to all he hadn’t” had the people not assumed this and just told him, he have been able to correct the misunderstanding or hid from Pedro and Pablo (Márquez 20). Fate is a very paradoxical topic because its power is either believed or rejected and either way it is always questioned. Márquez uses fate to make the readers question the reality of the death and whether or not the death could have actually been prevented. Everyone avoids addressing Santiago’s supposed crime which causes the reader to question the severity of the crime and whether or not Santiago is actually guilty. Another significant thing to mention is the use of the word “chronicle” in the title. This word suggests that the events recounted in the book occur in chronological order, however Santiago Nasar’s murder actually unfolds in a spiraling fashion. The narrator has come back to his home town to receive different accounts of Nasar’s murder only to find each person’s version is different is some way. This, again, is contrary to the implication that the events are chronological. Márquez uses this idea of chronology to create a paradoxical effect. He mentions specific times that certain event, like Santiago waking up, occur. This creates the paradox that the recount is happening chronologically when it is not really chronological.
ReplyDeleteWhat a way to start a book, Gabriel Garcia Marquez starts off it by essentially giving away the ending. This unusual narration is used to give a sense that things are not as they should be. The narrator in this first chapter is the son of Santiago’s godmother, and is very close to Santiago. However, he was not shown as being in this Latin American setting while the death was taking place. He seemed to have had many connections with people and reveals through this first chapter how many people had known and not said anything. From the townspeople, as Santiago walked away from the dock, they said that, ‘it seemed impossible to all that he hadn’t,” been warned about the twins planning to murder him(22). This shows how people don’t want to deal with murder or other aspects of life that are hard and displeasing to conversation. When passing by on his way to the docks, many of the people he passed knew and just didn’t say anything. One of the shop owners asked the murders to wait and, “leave him for later,” instead of killing him right away(17). Instead of warning Santiago, she simply was delaying his death and not helping anything. Gabriel Garcia Marquez shows through this interaction that people think that delaying something that is tough, that will somehow make the pain less. The pain of death can not be lessened however. An interesting sight at the end of this chapter was a crowd after the death with a sound as if, “the wedding party had started up,” again(26). This shows how so many people knew, yet it was only until after the death that they came out to comfort and console his mother. Marquez, however, does not fixate on the murders and if they are guilty, but more on the reaction of the townspeople, or the lack thereof.
ReplyDeleteAfter rereading the first chapter, a few things came to my attention. One major thing was the style of writing used to tell the story. I find it interesting how the entire story could easily be quickly told, but the narrator rather plays games with the story, focusing on small details such as what Santiago looks like and what his style of hair is. It is like the narrator is controlling the reader’s thoughts by only filling them in on one piece at a time so they will make assumptions that may not be true based on what they have already heard. This style sets the story up for many twists and unexpected turns and makes the reader excited to keep reading to see if their assumptions come true. Another thing I found interesting was the focus on the weather in the first chapter. It remains to be seen the purpose of this, but it seems to be a symbol of some sort or possibly foreshadowing. The narrator focuses on the different accounts from different people on what they thought the weather was like that day. I believe the purpose of this is to show the difficulty in recollecting events from the past perfectly as days can morph together in one’s memory and therefore no one’s account of the past can be trusted completely.
ReplyDeleteMy analysis is very similar to yours. I also noticed how long, and drawn out the telling of Santiago Nasar’s death is. It seems like the narrator could have easily retold the story in a shorter way, and also a simpler way. The story is told in a very confusing way that doesn’t go in chronological order, and adds unimportant information. Like you mentioned, it seems unnecessary to describe the weather on the day Santiago was murdered. I think that the narrator included this because the answers varied so much. Many said it was sunny, while others contrasted this by saying it was rainy, or Christmas weather. I agree with your analysis that the narrator did this to show how it is difficult to find the exact truth, and that everyone’s memories will be different. I think this is important to remember throughout this book because there are several things we never really have an exact answer of. Like whether or not Santiago took Angela’s virginity. These unimportant contrasting details play up this theme of not always knowing the truth.
DeleteIn Garcia Márquez’s book, Chronicle of a Death Foretold, one main plot is exploited through various points of view. The book’s main premise is the assassination of Santiago Nasar and how his life and death contributed with the various narrators within the chapters as the book progresses. A theme present in the first chapter and basically throughout the book, is the theme of secrecy. When the narrator talks about his sister and says, “She seemed to have secret threads of communication with the other people in town, especially those her age, and sometimes she would surprise us with news sso ahead of its time that she could only have known it through powers of divination” (Márquez 20), as this first reveals the hidden communication methods this community of people used to transfer rumors. This is critical in the book because this allows the book to build tension within its plot of how, and when Santi will be killed. The first chapter constantly keeps the reader in that suspense feel because of how unsure everybody is about the situation and how the whole assassination actually played out. It is a great introduction to the book because it formats in a very unique way of telling the plot immediately out of the gate and then slowly unveiling it through rumors and secrets. The notion of secrecy is also present in the beginnings of the plot because the plot basically originated from a secret; the secret of Angela losing her virginity.
ReplyDeleteI really like your plot analysis of the book. I like your quote to explain the communication that the small town had with each other, so a rumor such as a murder would spread very quickly. I think you should have also added the psychological "bystander effect", as it plays a large part in the whole secrecy theme. Most of the secondary characters had pretty lame excuses and motives to have Nasar killed, which is emphasized in the first chapter. But overall, I like how you analyze the theme of secrecy and how it connects to the main plot of Angela losing her virginity out of wedlock.
DeleteIn the second chapter, Gabriel Garcia Marquez explores the gender roles placed on women and girls in their marriage and in childhood. He also shows how a culture reacts to wealth and prestige. When Bayardo comes to this town, he is seen as a god, rich and beautiful. When he ses Angela for the first time, he does not even speak with her, just decides that he will marry her. He has to ask a landlady who she was, and when he realized that she was, “well-named,” he asked the woman to, “remind [him] that [he is] going to marry her” (31). This shows how men of high stature can simply chose their wife and there is nothing that the woman can do to refuse it. The Vicario, “brothers were brought up to be men,” and, “the girls had been reared to get married” (34). There was no question of individuality or an option of not getting married, it was a woman’s way to live off of the wealth of her husband, which is why it is quite sceptical of why she did not want to marry Bayardo. When Angela says that she does not want to marry because, “of a lack of love,” her mother simply responds with, “love can be learned” (38). This shows how her mother simply wanted wealth and did not truly care about Angela, just the outcome of the marriage. This is also seen when Bayardo returns Angela because of her not being a widow, her mother beats her for two hours. This was to a point where Angela thought that her mother, “was going to kill,” her because of her actions”(52). However, learned earlier, it was not out of her own will that she was no longer a virgin. When another had, “dissuaded her from her good intentions,” promising that, “almost all women lost their virginity in childhood accidents,” she gave in at an early age and was abducted(42). This was not uncommon for young women, and they had to keep this hidden, hoping for a husband that would graciously overlook this with his own problems. However, this crime, was very severe, and had to be avenged, so this is why the death of Santiago took place.
ReplyDeleteI also noticed the large amount of inequality between men and women in this book. Marquez writes, “The brothers were brought up as men. The girls had been reared to get married” (31). You included this quote in your analysis, and I also wrote about this quote. I think that this is one of the most important quotes in the book because it really explains the gender inequality. This quote shows how a man’s only job was to be a man. This was enough because men were so powerful, and didn’t need to do more than be the man of a family. Men at this time were in charge of their wives and children, and even had the power to choose who they were going to marry. The woman had little to no voice in the decision. The second part of the quote emphasizes women’s little power at the time. A woman was raised with the intentions that she would be married off, and that was all. She would become a housewife and put her husband and children’s needs before hers. Overall, we had similar interpretations of this quote, and noticed the gender inequality that is present.
DeleteWhile reading through the second chapter, in my eyes, there was an undeniable connection and similarity with this novel and the play Taming of the Shrew. Within the play Taming of the Shrew, the marriage between Petruchio and Katherine was very forced and arranged by Katherine’s father because he had all the qualities that one would need to sustain such a high social and economic status during the time period. Meaning, Petruchio had money, power, and authority which is all that really mattered making him a “perfect” match for Katherine in her father’s eyes. Bayardo San Roman is now the Petruchio of Chronicle of a Death Foretold. He is the man of the novel that has the money, power, authority, and attractiveness over people of the city while taking into account that his father sustains a large amount of power as well; much like Petruchio and his father. Bayardo San Roman wants to marry Angela Vicario, and although not compatable and the marriage lasts a very limited amount of time, it was arranged as well by each other their parents due to the materialistic side of each family. In other words, the marriage was not based on love or compatibility, rather how much money Bayardo had compared to Angela’s family and his authority. This also greatly brings up the fact and idea of male dominance over women as well; since Angela did not greatly have a choice on whether or not she wanted to marry Bayardo. Being the woman of the relationship Angela had little to no authority and was not able to make a decision on her own bringing along the theme, one that has been very popular within the past books, of male dominance.
ReplyDeleteQuickly before the two begin the journey into their relationship, Bayardo attempts to buy a house from a widower at the top of the hill, the most beautiful house of the city. The house contains all highly valuable items that remind the widower of his passed wife, counting the whole house itself, Bayardo just tries to buy off the man without any consideration on what each item means to the man. All he cares about is money rather love, another big similarity with Petruchio in The Taming of the Shrew. This representing the theme of money and power over love and affection.
The second chapter in “Chronicle of a Death Foretold” explores the cultural traditions of the time period in the novel. When Bayardo San Román comes to the little town, his mysterious figure and extreme wealth make it apparent that he has the power to do as he pleases and choose whomever he wishes to marry. The town discovers he has his sight set on Angela Vicario and after the Vicario’s meet his family, they are highly in favor of Bayardo marrying Angela. He also wins the approval of the Vicarios by showering Angela with expensive gifts when courting her. He never actually talks with her or dates her. This implies that he is interested in her because of her looks more than her personality. This leads to the portrayal of gender roles of that time. There is a clear difference between what is acceptable of women and men in the novel. The women must remain pure before marriage and after marriage she must remain faithful to her husband. The men could go about doing what they wanted to do. When it is revealed that Angela Vicario is not a virgin, her husband leaves her and her mother beats her almost to death. In contrast, the narrator reveals that he had just gotten engaged, yet he still sleeps with María Alejandrina Cervantes and is not reprimanded for his lack of fidelity in the slightest. Angela Vicario is forced to marry Bayardo even though she does not love him. “The girls had been reared to get married” in the culture of this time, the women could only improve their lives by marrying a wealthy husband (Márquez 31). The Vicario’s mother took advantage of gender roles and raised her daughters to be homemakers and suffer in silence. This allows them to be perfect, stereotypical wives.
ReplyDeleteChapter three of “Chronicle of a Death Foretold” portrays a theme of honor and explores the complexities of this concept. ““We killed him openly,” Pedro Vicario said, “but we’re innocent.” “Perhaps before God,” said Father Amador. “Before God and before men,” Pablo Vicario said. “It was a matter of honor”” the twins and other townspeople believe that honor justifies the murder of Santiago Nasar (Márquez 49). In Catholic societies during this time, honor, purity, and fidelity were very important concepts and moral traits. Those without honor became outcasts in society. When a person lost his/her honor, it was very difficult to regain it. If honor was to be restored, the punishment for the person who created the dishonor had to equal to the crime which caused the loss of honor. In Angela’s case, she has greatly dishonored her family and herself. Again, many people in the town did not try to stop the Vicario brothers because killing Santiago Nasar was seen as a punishment fit for his alleged crime, taking Angela’s virginity. His death is portrayed as a reasonable retribution for defiling an unmarried woman, which shows the severity of the crime. It also shows the large negative impact that action has on the woman’s life. She is unable to marry well, which was a woman’s only way to progress her social status. Another notable fact about the murder is the difference in the class of Santiago and Pedro and Pablo. Santiago’s character represents the upper class and how those with wealth had power and could do as they wished. The Vicario’s, like many of the other townspeople, were poorer and possibly envied Santiago’s fortune. Again, the upper class had power because they had wealth. Committing a crime against a wealthy person is worse than committing a crime against a poor person. Either way the criminal will be punished, but the class of the criminal and the class of the victim changes the length and severity of the punishment. Despite all this, the Vicario brothers still killed Santiago. This shows the importance of maintaining one’s honor at all costs in the society they live in.
ReplyDeleteamber mao
ReplyDeleteIn the second chapter, Bayardo San Roman is introduced and characterized. He is described as honest and charming and a good man and well liked by many, as well as incredibly rich. His family’s power and wealth is what gives him the influence to be able to marry Angela Vicario without much protest from anyone besides the bride herself. With his great sum of money, Bayardo San Roman had bought every single ticket for a raffle just to impress her, as well as a widower’s treasured home and an extravagant wedding. Being able to spend so much money so easily as marry just as quickly points to him being a rather shallow person, marrying just for the sake of it, and not for love, but still convincing everyone around him of how genuine he is. The narrator explains, "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 court her, but had bewitched the family with his charm… The parents’ decisive argument was that a family dignified by modest means had no right to disdain that prize of destiny. 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.’” (37-38) This is reflective of the culture of the time; Angela Vicario had to marry someone she didn’t care for because her family demanded it and because the groom’s family was rich and powerful. Bayardo San Roman received his bride rather like an object that he fancied; once he found out it was defective, he rejected it and returned it.
Chapter Two
ReplyDeleteThroughout the book Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Márquez writes about death in every chapter: the death of Santiago Nasar. Specifically in chapter two, Márquez uses irony and foreshadowing to reveal the theme that death is something that happens to everyone eventually (in this case, Santiago Nasar). Márquez writes, “Santiago Nasar had often told me that the smell of closed-in flowers had an immediate relation to death for him, and that day he repeated it to me as we went into the church” (Márquez 47). In this part of the book, Santiago is going to the wedding of Angela Vicario and Bayardo San Román in a church. It is very ironic that Santiago would say something about death when little does he know he is going to be murdered within the next 24 hours. It is even more ironic that he is saying this statement at the wedding of Angela Vicario: the sister of the murderers. This comment that he makes foreshadows that he will in fact be killed. Later in the chapter, after Angela’s mother beats her, she says, “I felt as if the drowsiness of death had finally been lifted from me” (52-53). This statement is also very ironic because death is going to be more prevalent in her life than ever from this moment forward. Right after she says this, her brothers ask her who took away her virginity and when she replies “Santiago Nasar,” the preparation to kill him will begin for the Vicario twins. Another way this quote could be interpreted is that the weight of death is being lifted from her, but being given to someone else; Angela is no longer going to suffer her mother’s beatings, but it will be Santiago who ultimately pays.
amber mao
ReplyDeleteBy the end of chapter 3 it is clear that “there had never been a death more foretold” (57) than that of Santiago Nasar. In the previous chapter, even though it was Angela Vicario’s own mother who beat her senseless, she placed the blame on Santiago Nasar for taking her virginity and causing her to be returned by her husband, which was a great loss of honor. This can be connected to the ideals of marianismo and machismo, where a woman’s value was placed entirely in her virginity and purity and men had to defend that honor to the point of killing someone. This sets off the entire chain of events resulting in Santiago Nasar’s death, which many of the characters that the narrator speaks to believe that the Vicario brothers were completely justified in killing him. Pablo Vicario’s fiancée, Prudentia Cotes, said that “’I knew what they were up to…and I didn’t only agree, I never would have married him if he hadn’t done what a man should do” (72). She is one of the fewer people who believed that honor was a good reason; most of the other people in the town simply didn’t believe that the brothers, who were known to be such good people that they would never kill anyone, and they were only drunk as they shouted to the whole town that they were going to kill Santiago Nasar. This differentiates his death from the death of Kitty Genovese in that the attack was provoked and everyone knew about it beforehand, so much so that it is as if he deserved to die for what he had done. Also, where Genovese’s killer showed no motive or remorse, the Vicario brothers “had done much more than could be imagined to have someone to stop them from killing him, and they had failed” (56). They had seemed to be trying to delay it, too, and had a lot to drink while they waited for him in Clotilde Armenta’s store; the narrator also mentions that killing Santiago Nasar could have been made easier by the fact that the brothers slaughtered hogs, but the words of the other butcherers suggest that that may not entirely be the case. Either way, “the twins declared at the end of the trial that they would have done it again a thousand times for the same reason.” (55)
You insights really reflect my notion that honor is so powerful in this society that it can drive people to commit immoral crimes like murder. This book is fascinating int that fact that the entire plot revolves around two men committing an immoral act, yet not doing it would have been against their morals. It's even more ironic that they are thought to be two of the nicest people in the town. These corrupted morals have the consequence of making the twins feel very guilty, as seen in the next chapter, as the narrator states, "Pablo Vicario told me without without any effort: 'It was like being awake twice over.’"(90). By being awake “twice over”, Pablo meant that he was not only awake in a literal sense and couldn’t sleep, but he was also mentally awakened to the crime he committed, reflecting how the twins were trapped in a moral dilemma.
DeleteChapter Three
ReplyDeleteIn Chapter three of Chronicles of a Death Foretold, the weather seems to mirror a certain aspect of the book. Different people say that the weather was different on the day of Santiago Nassar’s death. This directly reflects the uncertainties and confusion throughout the book. Through all of the interpretations of that day, there are some things that don’t add up right. Colonel Lázaro Aponte says, “I can remember with certainty that it was almost 5 o’clock and it was beginning to rain” (Márquez 64). This certainty that he has is very odd considering that others believed the weather to be different. This reveals the theme of how it is very difficult to come to conclusions based on memories. Later in the book Pablo Vicario says, “It was raining” (70). Referring to that same time, the one who kills Santiago has a different memory of the weather than someone much less involved in the crime. Immediately after that his twin brother says, “Just the opposite, there was a sea wind and you could still count the stars with your fingers” (71). Both Pablo and Pedro were together and did the same things that whole day, so isn’t a bit odd that they both have very certain memories on what the weather was like? It is impossible for al three of these weather conditions to have occurred at the same exact time, so that brings us to the question of who is right? When dealing with a crime, there are so many interpretations and it is hard to distinguish what is right and what is a false memorization.
I completely agree with your conclusions based on the different memories people have on the weather during the crime, which also reminds me of a quote in chapter 1, in which the narrator states how he is "trying to put the broken mirror of memory back together from so many scattered shards." (6). This quote made me think, therefore, how the narration of the book, and the information given to use is all coming from the point of view of the narrator. Therefore, there must be some error and misinterpretations, since, not only is he compiling information from an event that occurred 27 years ago, but he was the best friend of the victim.
DeleteChapter two in the story introduces a few cases of situational irony into the story. Bayardo San Roman is a good example of irony. He comes in search of the perfect wife, and he thinks he finds the ideal wife in Angela Vicario. However, of all wives he could have chosen, he chose the one who lied about her virginity. This is ironic because he was convinced that he would find the perfect bride, yet Angela was far from it. Angela Vicario also shows this example of situational irony as she trains her entire life for the sole purpose of being the perfect wife. She learns all the major skills of being a good housewife and how to take care of her husband, becoming skilled at things such as sewing and ironing. Becoming the perfect wife took a lot of hard work and effort, so one would believe that this would pay off for her in the end with a good husband as she would get to choose whoever she wanted. However, the irony comes in that when she gets ready to marry, she is exposed as far from perfect. Bayardo San Roman finds out that her virginity has been taken and that he has been lied to this whole time. This means Angela, the perfect wife, is unfit for marriage and is not an ideal wife.
ReplyDeleteIn the third chapter of the story, the sexist and patriarchal norms of this society are showcased through the double standards put on male and female virginity. It is common for men to lose their virginities and not face consequences, many of them sleeping with prostitutes often, yet value is placed on the virginity of a woman. This double standard is present throughout the book. The common theme in the book is that men sleep with prostitutes while women are meant to be pure. Prostitutes are a part of the life of the majority of men around the town, even going as far as to be provided to men at weddings. If these roles were flipped, the situation would be blasphemous, and yet it is considered normal in this patriarchal society. Angela is returned to her mother for not being pure in this chapter and is punished by her for a crime committed by almost every man in society. The goal set by the author for this double standard is to make the reader look at what being pure actually is, and if losing one’s virginity truly makes one not pure. The reader should look at women or humans as a whole instead of focusing on one trait when looking at purity in a person.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with your analysis of chapter 3 about the gender roles present in this book's setting. Like you said, this concept of women being pristine and like Virgin Mary before marriage basically was the cause and main concept of the story line and plot of the book. The entirety of the book revolves around this concept and is ironic because the book punishes the reverse concept. In the book when Angela was found not a virgin because of Santi, Santi is the one being ultimately punished with his life, while Angela just gets beat by her mother. This is seen as ironic because usually, the man has no punishment for sleeping with a women. However, in this case, due to family superiority and social conflicts, the man ends up being the center of attention and killed for his actions.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteSo, in chapter three this is from the perspective of mostly the two brothers in the beginning. The two brothers now must avenge their sister as a matter of dignity and kill the one who allegedly took away her virginity. To the brothers, they saw this as an innocent crime and that it was justified by being, “a matter of honor” (56). They were only concerned about how it had reflected poorly on their family and it was not seen as a crime to them in that society. Although they did end up going to jail for three years after the death, it was completely justified and even endorsed. When they stop in at Pablo’s fiancee’s home, she said that she knew what they were going to do, “and don't only agree, [but she] never would have married him if he hadn’t done what a man should do”(72). This shows that it was not a matter of life or death to them, but as raised to be men(34) it was their duty to simply protect the women around them. This quality was sought after by the brothers’ fiancee and she waited for him until he got out of jail to marry him. Marquez inserts the interaction with the fiancee to show how some people in that culture even endorsed this crime. Through the symbol of weather, and how people perceived the day showed what their inward reaction to the situation was. When Santiago was with the narrator and his brother, they stated how, “it hadn’t rained,” and how it was still just the beginning of the day of Santiago’s death(77). This shows the obliviousness of some people and how they neither thought the day was wonderful or not, just a normal day until the death. However, the brothers had commented on how it had been a nice day because they found nothing wrong with committing this crime.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading the third chapter in the novel, Chronicle of the Death Foretold, by Gabriel Garcia Marquez, I noticed, and found it very unusual and strange, how causally the people of the city found it when the Vicario brothers announced that they had decided to murder Santiago Nasar. Within the first few pages of the chapter, the plot takes place in the church where the two brothers were confessing their sins and Father Amador thought nothing of this horrid act of crime. He believed it was an act “before God,” and was one that was easily forgivable. Next, found on page fifty two, the narrator states,
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.”
And lastly, found on page fifty four the narrator says,
“It was such a spontaneous answer that she couldn't believe she’d heard right,” speaking of the reaction Clotilde Armenta had after learning of the news from the brothers that they were going to kill the man. These reactions, I believe, greatly influence the time period that the book was written in. Today, if one were to hear of the fact and plan of another wanting to murder one, they would most likely immediately report the possible crime, if mentally sain. Although, within the play people account for their, what seems to be, safe and ‘well-founded’ reputation the two brothers had and forgot about the fact that they wanted to take one’s life. Many years ago, crime was much higher than today and what was thought of as a crime was most likely far different as well. When thinking about our law and legal system each American citizen must abide by, one, no matter how well-founded their reputation was, would not easily be caught planning on murdering one. Although, in the novel the two twins publicize their plan to almost the whole city and no one thinks twice of it. This supports the idea that this novel is supposed to take place long ago just with this little difference in culture.
In the second chapter of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Marquez expresses a lot of various themes and third world inspirations in her writing. The main and most noticeable theme shown in the chapter is the idea of gender roles. She continually displays the stereotypical attributes of being a woman in the setting of Colombia. She uses quotes such as, “They were perfect. Any man will be happy with them because they’ve been raised to suffer” (GM, 31), to identify how big of a social gap there was between the men and women in families. Especially for two characters of Angela and Bayardo because Bayardo is from a rich and well-known family, while Angela is from a poor and deficient family. She is forced to marry him due to his popular and rich family, and is a very abusive and aggressive person. This is known through Marquez’s description of his background and family. While on the subject, family is also a huge part of the novel, which gets introduced in this chapter. The family honor each family shows is present and really reflects culture and a person’s growth into their community. A quote said about Angela’s mom really shows this as it 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 that she still existed” (GM, 31), which deeply connects with the reader because it explains how she is inexistent because of how much she works for her family.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteIn the third chapter of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Marquez discusses and explores the subject of prostitution and the stereotype of objectifying women. He displays how the society views maternal affairs and conflicts. The chapter also specifically expresses the value placed on a female's virginity and how it could impact relationships within a family and the community. Maria Alejandrina Cervantes is mentioned repeatedly throughout the chapter because she is continually objectified and is referenced as things such as “the most serviceable in bed,” and is described as “the most elegant and the most tender woman I have ever known” (GM, 34). These phrases and terms describes clearly how the difference in manners and attitude towards the women in their community in general is compared to the males. Maria is later then blamed that “it was she who did away with my generation’s virginity” (65), and is again referencing the men and their generation. The idea of pristinity linked to abstaining from premarital sex is obviously only applicable to women in this society. Angela is returned from her husband’s bed and beaten nearly to death by her mother for committing the same “wrongs” that were completely acceptable when committed by the men. Santiago Nasar and Pablo Vicario are both described as having premarital sex and engaging in frequent sexual relations with the prostitutes of the town. Prostitutes are even provided as a service at the wedding, and it described how “They’d been working without cease for three days, first taking care of the guests of honor in secret then turned loose, the doors wide open for those of us still unsated by the wedding bash” (64). This compares the girls to wedding entertainment to be utilized when one was bored.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteamber mao
ReplyDeleteIn chapter 4, the part about Santiago Nasar’s corpse is a continuation of the townsfolk’s sentiment towards him still. The poorly performed autopsy seemed rather unnecessary, given that they knew who had committed the crime and the victim had obviously died because of numerous stab wounds, and the narrator said that afterwards “they gave us back a completely different body”, with most of it destroyed beyond recognition (88). Then “the empty shell, stuffed with rags and quicklime and sewed up crudely with coarse twine and baling needles, was on the point of falling apart when we put it into the new coffin with its silk quilt lining” shows how little people cared even then, when Santiago Nasar’s guts had been carved out the remains a gross imitation of a person (88). Earlier in the chapter, the priest had said that “it was as if we killed him all over again after he was dead” (83). This kind of treatment towards a dead body seems disrespectful, intentional or not, because of the lack of skill of the people doing the autopsy. Because of the incredibly specific description of Santiago Nasar’s wounds that the narrator provides, it gives the reader a slight feeling of revulsion from the graphicness, even through the narrator’s tone of clinical detachment. The dogs in the house also wanted to eat Santiago Nasar’s guts, and would not stop howling – this is another sign of the townsfolk’s attitude towards his death, remaining rather passive and most of them feeling it was right for Santiago Nasar to die in revenge for Angela Vicario’s honor. However, the brothers were affected by his death – they could not sleep, and became ill – the smell of death clung to them relentlessly like the blood that stained their hands in the name of honor.
amber mao
ReplyDeleteIn chapter five, the exact events on the day of Santiago Nasar’s death are finally known. Many of the characters are still haunted by the event: “The cocks of dawn would catch us trying to give order to the chain of many chance events that had made absurdity possible, and it was obvious that we weren’t doing it from an urge to clear up mysteries but because none of us could go on living without an exact knowledge of the place and mission assigned to us by fate” (113). The role of fate in magical realism is shown here, with the “chain of many chance events” and the “place and mission assigned to us by fate” in developing the idea that Santiago Nasar’s death was foretold by fate and thus unavoidable. However “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, giving access only to those who are part of the drama”, indicating that the townspeople are still much in the same mindset of passiveness regarding the murder, using honor as a reason to stand by and do nothing, reducing the entire situation to nothing more than a “drama” (114). Despite Angela Vicario’s unwavering statement that Santiago Nasar was the one who violated her honor, evidence began to show in favor of the opposite: “when he finally learned at the last moment that the Vicario brothers were waiting for him to kill him, his reaction was not one of panic, as has so often been said, but rather the bewilderment of innocence” (118). Cristo Bedoya and Yamil Shaium were the only ones who actively tried to help Santiago Nasar, but to no avail, because no one could find him – he somehow, impossibly, went into his fiancée’s house without anyone noticing, which could be another instance of fate dooming him to die. His confusion as he tried to find his way home, followed by the voices of the townspeople shouting at him, seems to further prove his innocence because he didn’t know why they were going to kill him. His own mother absolved herself of blame for locking the front door, ultimately sealing her son’s fate – she believed it was Divina Flor’s fault for telling her something that wasn’t true. The last few pages, laden with the surrealism of Santiago Nasar walking home in the morning light, holding his guts in his hand, is the greatest example of the magic in magical realism.
At this point in time, in chapter four, Santiago has officially been murdered by the Vicario brothers and the mood and tone within the town after the event has completely changed. Specifically focusing on the Vicario brothers and the impact the murder had on the two men. After the murder, the aspect and idea of karma comes into great perspective. These two men killed and took the life of an innocent man based off rumor and now it’s as if the world is out to get them due to their wrongdoings and major ethical mistakes they have made.
ReplyDelete“The pain in his groin had reached his throat, his urine was shut off, and he suffered the frightful certainty that he wouldn't sleep ever again for the rest of his life.” (80)
“Pablo Vicario, for his apart, ate a little bit of everything they brought him, and fifteen minutes later unloosed a pestilential diarrhea. At six in the afternoon… the mayor was summoned urgently because Pedro Vicario was convinced that his brother had been poisoned.” (80)
Both brothers are experience immense pain and toles on their bodies and of course it all occurs after the murder of Santiago Nasar. Its as if its their ‘faith’ or karma coming back to haunt them from what they have done. Now although there are many others to blame for the lose of Santiago Nasar, since almost every towns person knew of his future death, but did nothing to stop the two, each brother still takes much more responsibility and blame since they were the two to actually execute the killing of Santiago Nasar. The karma is the fact that their bodies are now taking the toll for what has happened as if they are dying themselves.
Chapter 4
ReplyDeleteIn chapter four of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, the theme of that everything is predetermined is continued. With this, there are aspects of fate and karma seen throughout this chapter. Throughout the whole book, fate plays a role in Santiago’s death, but fate also plays a role in the Vicario brothers’ punishments. After the autopsy of Santiago Nasar, Dr. Dionisio Iguarán says, “he only had a few years of life left to him in any case” (87). He is saying that Santiago would have died soon even if it weren’t for him being murdered. This shows how his death was predetermined no matter the circumstances. Later in the chapter when the Vicario brothers are in jail, Márquez writes, “The pain in his groin had reached his throat, his urine was shut off, and he suffered the frightful certainty that he wouldn’t ever sleep again for the rest of his life” (92). Pedro Vicario was suffering from insomnia. This problem can be tied back to the idea of karma; he murdered someone, so the universe is punishing him in return. Not only is Pedro suffering, Pablo is too. Márquez writes, “Pablo Vicario, for his part, ate a little bit of everything they brought him, and fifteen minutes later unloosed a pestilential diarrhea” (92). Like his brother, Pablo helped murder Santiago and is therefore being punished for his wrongdoing by a horrible stomach issue. The Vicario brothers weren’t punished enough for their atrocity, so the universe had to punish them to create balance of good and bad.
I definitley agree with your interpretation of the text. In my blog post I also examined the karma. You could further support this by tying the punishments back into the seven deadly sins to show how religion is related. Also the Vicario brothers did suffer after committing the murder. They both had the stench of Santiago on them and had to deal with all of their stomach problems while in jail. And to add to that both brothers went onto doing risky jobs a while later (leading to the death of one).. do you think this is how the universe could have punished them?
DeleteChapter 5
ReplyDeleteMagical realism is displayed in chapter five of Chronicle of a Death Foretold. Throughout the whole novel, Márquez uses aspects of magical realism to tell the story of the murder of Santiago Nasar. Márquez ends the book with a couple unrealistic aspects to tie the story together. After Santiago learns that he is going to be murdered by the Vicario brothers, Márquez writes, “Santiago Nasar went backward and forward several times, baffled by hearing so many voices at the same time” (Márquez 136). This is an example of magical realism because the narrator cannot actually know what Santiago is feeling or thinking. Santiago may have appeared “baffled” but the narrator cannot know for sure that he was “baffled by hearing so many voices at the same time.” It is as if the narrator is inside Santiago’s mind, explaining how he feels. Also, later in the chapter after Santiago had been attacked by the Vicario brothers, Márquez writes, “they were sitting down to breakfast when they saw Santiago Nasar enter, soaked in blood and carrying the roots of his entrails in his hands” (Márquez 142). After being stabbed so many times to the point where his intestines have come out of his body, it seems very unrealistic that Santiago is walking around with his guts in his hands still very much alive. It is almost as if Santiago is a God or Saint to still be alive and functioning holding his body parts. Even though this story is very realistic, there are aspects like these two that give it a magical and fictional feel.
I heavily agree on your analysis and topics you discussed in chapter 5 about magical realism and how Marquez uses the illusional aspects to create a deeper and more thoughtful tone for the reader. Marquez repeatedly and effectively uses this technique to create an uneasy and more complex mood within the reader while they are reading this because all the unrealistic details supports the main plot and how the storyline plays out. I mostly agree on your analysis about Santi’s descriptions used by Marquez to create a fictional feel, however, I thought these uses of magical realism actually supports the realistic concepts and events taken place because it gives the reader an indescribable feeling that somehow feels relatable. It is very unique, but I feel like it it used very effectively by Marquez.
DeleteChapter four portrays the events after Santiago Nasar’s murder. His body is discretely compared to that of a butchered animal. ““Help me,” she shouted to me. “What they want is to eat his guts”” the dogs cannot tell the difference between animal entrails and their master’s entrails (Márquez 73). The body is saved from being destroyed by the dogs, but is still massacred by the people performing the autopsy. The entrails the dogs would have eaten are thrown in the trash. Part of the description of the body compares the death to “a stigma of the crucified Christ” (75). This suggests that Santiago’s death was possibly a sacrifice for the sins of the community. The town is plagued with Santiago’s sent suggesting that the smell symbolizes the guilt felt by all because everyone failed to prevent the murder of Nasar, who may or may not have been innocent. The theme of sexism is also portrayed through the town’s reaction to the incident. Angela has been beaten by her mother, abandoned by her husband and has lost her honor. Still Bayardo is seen as the ultimate victim of the whole thing because he lost his wife. Angela has lost far more and yet many fail to pity her like they pity Bayardo. The readers also discover Angela Vicario’s new obsession with Bayardo San Roman after he leaves her. She sends nearly two thousand letters to him, yet he never reads any of them. This indicates the ritualistic nature of romantic love in their society. The content of the letters are less important than the fact that Angela wrote them and Bayardo received them. This seems to relate the two through the idea of courtship. Initially, he was buying her gifts as a method of courting her. Now she attempts to get him back by writing him letters. Bayardo underscores their relationship by placing more symbolic importance on the letters than the content, which, again, makes their relationship ritualistic.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with your analysis. I never thought about the theme of sexism and how it is portrayed in this chapter with Angela and Bayardo San Roman. I think your analysis of the quote about Christ is very accurate like when you said that it suggests that Santiago’s death was a sacrifice for the sins of the town. In my blog I discussed how karma and fate were the reasons why Santiago died and were also the reasons why the Vicario brothers had health issues in jail. I agree more with your interpretation explaining the reason for Santiago’s death. It’s almost like he is receiving the karma from things that his community did wrong.
DeleteAfter reading chapter five, I am very disgusted with the details of the murder, to begin with. I feel as if the details of the murder were not included within the whole novel or chapter five, there would be a great element missing since the whole story revolves around the murder of Santiago Nasar. The topic that I personally wanted to focus on though was the psychological aspect of Santiago Nasar when hearing about his own future murder. Personally, if the whole town of people I lived in informed me on the fact that two men were preparing to murder me in the midst of minutes, terrified would be an understatement. One can effortlessly understand the state of overwhelmingness that Santiago was under after hearing about his future death as the whole town screams and yells at him as to what he should do or where he should go to avoid the Vicario brothers. I question though what was running through Santiago’s head at this time. Was he fearful, was he confused, or was he in a state of clear disbelievement? Found on page 115, the narrator writes, “They began to shout at him from every side, and Santiago Nasar went backward and forward several times, baffled by hearing so many voices at the same time.” From that specific quote, the reader can enfer how confused and conflicted he was. Although I question how he still ended up deciding to choose to not follow what every single town person was saying, and decided to enter his home. What made him decide to walk himself to his own death and why did he not try to contact authorities or police in efforts to protect himself? There are many questions that run through my head when thinking about Santiago’s psychological state at this point in time that one can sadly only use a very educated guess on.
ReplyDeleteI found your analysis very interesting. When I look at this quote I think about the community aspect of his death. A normal person's reaction to seeing Santiago in the streets would be to hide him in your house, or something like that. But instead, the crowd of people just yells at him. They yell at him so much that he doesn't even understand what's going on. And no one makes a move to help him get to his own home safely. Even if they thought they were helping, all they were doing was confusing him and not one person had the idea to actually physically help him. Talking about psychology though, when I read just this quote I instantly think of someone with a mental disability, like schizophrenia because it says "[He was] hearing so many voices at the same time" and that is a trait for people with psychosis. Lastly, to answer your question: what made him decide to walk to his own death? My idea was that him walking to his own death was Marquez reiterating that the death of Santiago was fate and no matter what he did he was going to die anyways.
DeleteThroughout the novel, many of the events leading to Santiago Nasar’s murder are attributed to fate. The fifth chapter portrays the actual minutes before and during his death. “The people had stationed themselves on the square the way they did on parade days” this portrays that the townspeople believed they were spectators and not actors in the events of the murder (Márquez 115). The narrator obscures his role by acknowledging the fact that he, like everybody else in the town, is not blameless. The events leading to the murder are portrayed as coincidental and destined, yet many still feel guilty for their lack of action in an easily preventable incident. The townspeople are seen as observers, powerless forces that cannot stop the inevitable. The Colonel is a figure that represents power, yet he fails to prevent the murder because he is checking on a dominoes game. While it appears that Márquez is attempting to attribute the events to fate, he portrays that the townspeople wish to blame fate, but cannot successfully do so. Many people developed strange afflictions after hearing of Santiago’s death which suggests the town feels guilty for not preventing it. The suffering of the town is a subconscious attempt to make amends for their sins (not stopping the crime). In the end, Divina Flor has a vision of Santiago coming into the house carrying flowers. This vision foreshadows Santiago entering the house with his entrails in his hands. Many could have prevented the death, yet the vision suggests that is was unavoidable. Márquez uses this contrast to create the magical realism in the novel. He also used surrealism to portray Santiago, after he has been stabbed, to create the magical effect. “Then he went into his house through the back door that had been open since six and fell on his face in the kitchen” this ends the magical effect with the last portrayal of reality, Santiago’s death (120).
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with your analysis. However, could you maybe elaborate more on the concept of fate? How was Santiago necessarily a victim to this? Why is it that fate is the one to blame for the tragedy? Overall, I think your analysis, especially when you mention the visions people are having before his death. :)
DeleteHey! Chapter four starts out with the Santiago once again being butchered like an animal. This being foretold in the beginning when the dogs were waiting for the rabbits innards, now want their masters to feast on. However, the dogs are killed and Santiago's innards end up being tossed in the garbage pail anyways(88). The referral to Santiago’s hand would being a, “stigma of the crucified Christ,” once again shows how he had died for the sins of the community(87). This is an analogy to the death of Christ because Santiago is portrayed to have done nothing wrong. Allso near the end of this chapter, the narrator infers that Angela had said Santiago because she thought her brothers, “would never dare go up against him,” because of his wealth(104). Chapter four also i noticed has many references to magical realism. The fact that everything smelled of Santiago, even though he had not been near thers, show how reality was mixed with fantasy(90). Another example is Xius’ thinking that the disappearing items from his house were because his dead wife was taking them(100). This also shows how his reality and dream likeness is not clear where one stops and the other starts.
ReplyDeleteThe last half of this chapter tells of Angela and her life after her wedding night. How her, “ mother had tried to burry her alive,” and how her mother had made it so that, “Angela die[d] in life” (101, 103). Angela revealed that she had been truthful to Bayardo and had not wanted to do what her friends had suggested and trick Bayardo into thinking she was a virgin. This shows how women tried at all costs to keep their virginity or a secret if they had lost it. Marquez depicts Angels as “becom[ing] a virgin again just for him” and continued writing him letters for 12 years(109). This shows persistence and that a woman has to have a man to succeed. If she didn't need a man she would have continued living without giving another thought. Bayardo finally returns at the end, with more than 2000 unopened letters(111), symbolizing that he didn't need words, but only her persistence to make him come back.
So in the last Chapter I was really hit by how awful Santiago’s death was. I found that the gruesome facts just made the death so much worse and Santiago’s confusion just added to how terrible it was. When Nahir Miguel tells Santiago that, “the Vicario brothers were looking for him to kill him,” Santiago did not have and expression of fear, but that of confusion(135). This was very eye opening that he was confused and that his first reaction was to go out into the streets unarmed knowing he would be killed. Also, another report said that his response was not that of panic, “but rather the bewilderment of innocence”(118). His reaction showed once again that he had not commited this crime against Angela and was being framed for it.
ReplyDeleteA symbol of this framing is when the brothers were killing Santiago. Pedro, after already stabbing him three times, acknowledged, “that the knife kept coming out clean”(139), symbolizing that Santiago was innocent and had done nothing wrong to deserve this kind of death. Santiago not seeming to bleed, juxtaposed with the terrible murder from the brothers suggests he had never lost his purity. This is also another reference to magical realism because there was probably bloo on the knife, but Pedro may have not been thinking in the real world and not been in his right mind.
The uncertainty in this book is overwhelming. I found that when the judge was reviewing the papers and, “the marginal notes...seemed to be written in blood,” this not only symbolized how gruesome the event was, but also how much could have been changed(116). This being said, the red would be like corrections made in the document, so people never knew what had actually happened or if it was just changed from the original reports. This parallels Santiago’s confusion and how aspect were not as clear as they once were and they will never truly be resolved.
Your analysis greatly helped my understanding of the chapter and the book in general. It gave me some food for thought because of how you expressed the non-stereotypical view of the plot. Your idea of Angela's virginity being a mystery and that the Santi might not have actually taken it was very informative. I never thought about this, and the magical realism in the description of the murder is great analysis. Another point that I thought about after reading this blog was the idea that maybe Angela was abused by her father and that she was so embarrassed that she never shared her story.
DeleteIn chapter four of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, Marquez explores the outcomes and consequences of the murder of Santi. The chapter begins with Santi’s body being buried and getting forgotten as a person because of the outrageous act he committed. However, this is the main controversy and question the entire book creates; was Santi really guilty for an act that he had no intention of doing? This is unclear throughout the book and continues to question the qualities of a person’s life within this community of people. This also stresses the value and importance of marriage and the concept of Marianismo within the Colombian culture. Marianismo is the idea and expectation of a lady before marriage. She must be pristine to the highest level before marriage or else it will show a great sign of disrespect and lack of loyalty to her husband, family, and society. Although Angela did not obey to these expectations, she was not the one who got punished most severely, Santi was. This chapter also continues to question and create the theme of life and death. This is shown with Bayardo San Roman because of how he was found in his home almost committing suicide with alcohol. However, with the help of Angela, he comes back to her years after and desires to be with her for the rest of the chapter. Angela barely gets punished for her losing her virginity throughout the book. She does get beaten by her mother in the previous chapter, but her moving to another city allows her to create a new and blank slate.
ReplyDeleteYou mentioned how this chapter displays the outcomes and consequences of the murder of Santiago. Not only does Santiago and Angela suffer, but the murderers also have consequences. To better your analysis, I think that you could add how the Vicario brothers were punished because they murdered Santiago. Márquez writes, “The pain in his groin had reached his throat, his urine was shut off, and he suffered the frightful certainty that he wouldn’t ever sleep again for the rest of his life” (92). This quote is referring to Pedro and the insomnia and health issues that he suffers in jail. The murdering of Santiago causes this suffering for Pedro. It can be explained by karma; because the Vicario brothers weren’t punished enough by the justice system for their crime, the universe ultimately punishes them.
DeleteThe fourth chapter of the play conveys the motif of blame throughout the story. In chapters 1-4, it was very common for the events that occurred to be seen as fate and the reader was meant to see the death of Santiago Nasar as fate or destiny. However, this was due to the fact that the events were often portrayed through the recollection of events from those involved in the story; those who could have been blamed for some of what occurred. It is said in the chapter that “They took it for granted that the other actors in the tragedy had been fulfilling with dignity, and even with a certain grandeur, their part of the destiny that life had assigned them” (96).
ReplyDeleteThis shows how, even in this chapter, no one wants to take responsibility for their own actions. It is now realized that many had responsibility for what happened and yet they all blame it on destiny, and do this throughout the story. Fate was just a cover-up for the mistakes made by each and every person in the story, being used as something to ease the guilt.
As talked about in my chapter four blog, there is a common theme of blame in the book, and this comes from the guilt that everyone feels for the murder of Nasar. Up until the last chapter, everyone feels they played a part and have something to feel guilty about. However, in the last chapter this changes when the reader learns of how Nasar was killed. While the reader knew he died and who did it, it is not until the end of the book that the severity of the death is revealed. It is here that it is seen that the Vicario brothers are unlikely to feel guilt over their actions. If they had any empathy for Nasar, they would not have slaughtered him in such a harsh and painful way. Their actions break the theme of guilt and blame in the book by showing two people that feel no guilt for their wrongdoing and therefore have no need to blame anyone. They clearly believe that getting revenge for their sister is more important than this man’s life, going against everything seen in the book so far.
ReplyDeleteIn the final chapter of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, the narrator continues to express and question the reality of the situation. In this chapter, a more detailed and explained story of the murder was shared by Santi’s friend, who walked with him earlier the day he was killed. This chapter explains the confusion and reaction of the rumors by Santi. Santi had as much information as the reader of this book before the reader picked up this book. He said Santi was running all over the place trying to figure an explanation of the situation, but before he got the answer, he was killed. The main theme I thought this chapter most indicated was the lack of action. In this chapter, Santi is continually running back and forth trying to figure out why someone is trying to kill him, and everyone would keep telling him to do something or run. Everyone was a spectator and just watched. They all barely helped and never put action, which really displays the community of people in which this book took place in. The narrator also could not tell the difference between a spectator or a person who acts because he himself is biased to how his community acts. He is apart of the community and this brings up the question; is this normal behavior? Due to family traditions and how the parents raised their kids, this might possibly be the case.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with you and you bring up an interesting point in questioning the social norms that are taught by the members of society. Their culture of machismo, I would definitely say played a part in the apathy of the community as they wouldn’t have found much fault in the actions of the two brothers who were just trying to avenge the harm done to their family name. This importance attached to the honor of the family would have distorted the views of the community to view such motivations with a different perspective then someone else who might say that murder is never justified, especially in these situations. Despite knowing about the impending murder, the people within Santiago Nasar’s community maintained a lack of urgency that would fit with their lack of concern with the prospect of murder.
Delete