All About the Wonderful Carnival

The last part of Chapter 10 takes place during carnival. Mikhail Bakhtin, a Russian philosopher and literary critic, held opinions on what the terms "carnival" and "grotesque" meant. He outlines that carnival is a social institution and grotesque (grotesque realism) as as a literary mode. He saw the carnival as something in which everyone was considered equal and that those attending a carnival do not merely constitute a crowd; rather the people are seen as a whole. Bakhtin once said, "All were considered equal during carnival. Here, in the town square, a special form of free and familiar contact reigned among people who were usually divided by the barriers of caste, property, profession, and age." Everyone is part of an equal class during carnival according to Bakhtin. He also outlines it as a time in which people can "not" be themselves but instead the unique sense of time and space should cause individuals to feel that they are a part of the collectivity. He also thinks that grotesque and carnival are connected. He says that grotesque is used to describe a bodily change through eating, defacation, and sex. He says that grotesque is the measuring device that shows how a person changes through these three ways. At the carnival, everyone is treated as equal and it seems as though everyone is living in luxury. This is how Bakhtin's definition of carnival relates to the carnival in this chapter. When he talks about the carnival, he says that everyone is treated equally and that people are blinded by the many nice things that happen to them. People become ignorant and happy in the carnival. It may seem like a nice event that everyone can participate in without being treated unfairly, but it means that people cannot be very different if everyone is considered the same and have an equally good experience.

I Was My Own Route

Upon reading "I Was My Own Response", I was able to conclude that I probably won't ever understand Julia de Bugos. The poem starts out by saying that she wants to be like men want her to be. My interpretation of that was that she could possibly be being used by men in general. But I think that the overall message of this poem is her statement that she wants to change certain aspects in her life. Earth does not accept walking backwards, something that she may want to do. Her walking backwards could be something that she happens to do differently in life and the earth or its people may not be so accepting to allow her to do this. In the third stanza we find that several things in her life are or will be changing. the "distant familiar horizons" that she describes could be how she is becoming separated from a familiar asepect of her life and is no longer so close to these "horizons". She also talks about "new paths" that she could be taking sometime in the near future. It seems as though everything that she is familiar with is now becoming more and more distant. The poem ends with the final stanza at first sounding just like the first one. However, by the fifth line of the last stanza, she changes what she had already written into something different. The concludes by saying that "the desire to follow men warped in me, and the homage was left waiting for me." She is once again talking about men in her life, but instead she talks about how she is following men rather than men wanting her to live her life in a certain way.

A Very Strange Poem Indeed

"Pentachrome" by J. de Burgos is one of the strangest poems that I've ever read. One thing that stands out in my mind when I first read this poem was how she starts each stanza (except the first) by saying "Today I want to be a man". When she says this, I think that she may be a man trapped inside a woman's body (perhaps only for a day since she did specifically say "Today" and not "every day") or possibly a schizophrenic. She talks about how she wishes to be Don Quijote or Don Juan, who are both fictional characters from Spanish literature in the seventeenth and nineteenth centuries, respectively. According to Wikipedia, Don Juan is used synonymously for "womanizer", especially in Spanish slang. Don Juan is also known for seducing women and enjoys fighting their champions. By saying that she wants to be like this man goes against everything that woman during this time period were probably trying to fight for. I cannot tell if this poem was written for shock-value or whether she wrote this from the depths of her heart, hoping to get some strange message across to her readers. It also surprises me that she talks about how she wants to "abduct Sor Carmen and Sor Josefina, conquer them, and rape Julia de Burgos". That's only slightly confusing how she talks about how she wishes to rape herself, unless she truly does want to move into the other's shoes (Don Juan and Don Quijote). This poem may have been written to insult womanizers or other anti-women's rights people at the time, but initially, this poem seems to serve purely as shock value for it's unsuspecting audience.

What Color? Poem

Observing the poem "What Color?" I find that the author contradicts himself at times or sometimes makes a few points that I find slightly confusing. The author talks about a pastor who has a "white soul". However, they then say that "His skin so black, they say, his skin so black in color." After that they again talk about how (he was) "on the inside snow." I find this point a little confusing though. I understand how white stands for peace (dove) and innocence (generally a blank slate), but I don't understand why the author is making it seem like the pastor on the inside is "white" and that there "wasn't one stain on his impeccable interior." I find the points that he is white on the inside and black on the outside very contradicting. Does the author mean to say that white always stands for good while as black does not? It seems to me that the author stresses the point that this pastor is technically black, but he really isn't since he is white on the inside. I'm not too sure but this poem to me sounds a little racist. Why would the author describe the pastor's soul as (not having) "one stain on his impeccable soul."? Does that mean that if black (or any color not white) stains get on the interior of this pastor, then he is no longer pure or noble? Does this mean that the pastor stands for all things good and evil at the same time? The part that sounds most contradicting to me is the part about "His skin was black, but with the purest soul, white as the snow..." since it should not matter what color the pastor's skin or soul is.

Blog 2

With regards to the conversation with Nina Scott, I thought that the conversation was very interesting and informing. She discussed many things with us and tried to answer all of the questions that we put forward. I thought it was intriguing that Sab was her first literary translation more than fifteen years ago. It took her a long time to translate, years I believe. However, when she was translating it, she wanted it to sound like it was from the 19th century and not the present. Although she said it was a difficult book to translate, it was easier than translating poetry, since poetry's true meaning can certainly be lost through translation. I thought that was interesting because even though it took her years to get through Sab, she would rather have translated a work of literature such as that rather than poetry. When we asked her some questions, she came up with some terrific answers and went into great details too. When we asked her when she thought Sab truly gained freedom in the novel was when he held the winning lottery ticket. Since the lottery picks people at complete random, it didn't matter what your race or sex was, because when you were picked, it was something that anyone could have been capable of. When Sab was chosen, he was, in that situation, the luckiest person and was capable of winning it. She also pointed out that Carlota and Enrique could not make it through the caves, although Sab could. When we asked her why we thought Sab would not kill Enrique, she responded by answering that Sab was holding his code of honor for not only Carlota, but the entire family. He knew that morally it was right to fulfill his duty in protecting Enrique.

Blog 1

Simon Bolivar's captivating "Jamaica Letter" talks about how Spain and Europe will not give the Latin American colonies a chance to gain freedom. Bolivar heavily criticizes Spain for it's power hungry attitude and great desire to rule the countries in Latin and South America. He does acknowledge that Spain is the mother country of these new Latin American countries, but emphasizes the fact that they are now ready for independence. Even though the countries and Spain have shared interests, knowledge, religion, and mutual goodwill, they simply can no longer be ruled by the Spanish crown. Bolivar argues that once the countries have completely split from Spain, peace and prosperity will grow throughout Latin and South America. He says that "Nearly a million people once lived in Venezuela, and I can say without exaggeration that a fourth of them have been sacrificed by the terrain, the sword, hunger, plague, and homeless wandering. Except for the earthquake, all of this is the result of war." (15) and "...more than a million men have died, as you will see in the report made by Mr. Walton, who describes in detail the bloody crimes committed in that wealthy empire." (15) Bolivar also suggests that Europe (not just Spain) seems to have no sympathy for the countries trying to break away from Spain. He argues that "...sixteen million Americans defend their rights or live oppressed by the Spanish nation which, once the vastest empire on earth, is now reduced to remnants that can neither dominate the new hemisphere nor even maintain control of the old. And civilized Europe, merchant, lover of liberty, will she allow a decrepit serpent to devour the most beautiful part of the globe out of pure venomous rage? What? Is Europe deaf to the clamor of her own interests? Has she no eyes to see justice? Has she become inured to the suffering of others to be this insensitive?" (15) According to Bolivar, Spain's involvement with the Latin American countries has not been to their benefit. Bolivar actually argues that Spain should try and strengthen their own econonmy before trying to rule others in the Western Hemisphere. He says that "...so by focusing on her own immediate interets she could begin to rebuild her prosperity and power on foundations far more solid than these uncertain conquests, precarious commercial enterprises, and violent pillaging in lands that are remote, hostile, and powerful." (16) Bolivar also feels that once the Latin American nations are free to govern, trade with Europe will create stronger economies in both Europe and Latin and South America.