Chapter One of the novel Chronicle of a Death Foretold sets the scene for an intriguing tale to come. The first few pages allude to the death of Santiago Nasar. The narrator seems to construct a timeline around Nasar’s pending death, stating, “... he’d described to her on the mornings preceding his death.”(Marquez 4) and, “...until the Monday of his death”(Marquez 7), which show the serious of events in the novel revolve around an event that has yet to come in the story but has already happened in the past. (A fact that is indicted by the narrator’s use of past tense) Furthermore, we she the emotions of the event through the fond recollections of Nasar’s mother, as she says, “‘He was the man in my life.’” The reader gains some insight into the emotional impact of Nasar’s impending death and how it impacted the people around. This is have the effect of giving a certain level of weight to such an important event. The reader also witnesses a case of irony as the narrator gives into detail about Santiago Nasar’s well proliferated firearms collection, an accumulation of useless weapons as we know that these will not save him from death. The weather in the first chapter is heavily used to portray the flimsiness of the anecdotal accounts, as the different citizens of the town have vastly different recollections of what the weather was like on the morning of Nasar’s death and whether or not it happened to be raining.
In the first chapter of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, I noticed that the author mentions the weather many times, "... funereal, with a cloudy, low sky and the thick smell of still waters..." (4). By using the word funeral, Marquez foreshadows the death of Santiago. He uses harsh and saddened nature imagery to convey the tone of despair, as his death is soon approaching. I also found it interesting that the color of Santiago’s clothing was white, as white usually stands for purity and hope. These were the clothes that he was killed in, they may be a symbol that he was very innocent in the act and did not deserve what he had coming. I also noticed a lot of animal imagery. One that caught my interest was the mentioning of a rooster. The Bishop’s boat makes the roosters start to crow which also “arouses all the other roosters in town.” (16) Roosters crowing is an ordinary event, however every single rooster in town crowing would not occur in the real life. Marquez may have added this miniscule event in the story to represent a form of magical realism, and that magic exists in everything such as everyday occurrences, even if it’s not naked to the eye.
“Remembered him as being a little sleepy but in a good mood, and he remarked to all of them in a casual way that it was a very beautiful day. No one was certain if he was referring to the state or the weather. Many people coincided in recalling that it was a radiant morning with a sea breeze coming in through the banana groves, as was to be expected in a fine February of that period.” (4) I found the start of this story to be rather intriguing with a tone that felt cold and off putting. The language is plane without much emotion although there's quite a lot of imagery, for example, “sea breeze coming through the banana groves” is both tactile and visual imagery. Looking at the bright diction within this passage, “radiant morning”,”beautiful weather”, and “sea breeze”, you expect the tone to be lighter hearted. However the language and formation of sentences creates a translation that is rather robotic and uncomfortable for the readers. I believe this is due to the sophisticated and upfront diction of verbs such as coincided, recalling, was to be expected, etc. The romantic language is read in a choppy tone without an emotional grab which is quite odd for a introduction to a story. The beginning of the story is also told in first person where the narrator is recalling events that are oddly specific, “sea breeze through the banana trees” or “no one was certain if he was referring to the state or the weather”. In modern day culture, when someone says, “it's a very beautiful day”, not much thought is put into it. It’s more of a greeting such as hello. In 2016, a greeting such as that would often be overlooked or agreed upon without being processed. The intense detail also begins the story for me on a bit of an off note due to the over- reading of the. simple greeting.
“Furthermore: all the many people he ran into after leaving his house at five minutes past six and until he was carved up like a pig an hour later remembered him as being a little sleepy but in a good mood, and he remarked to all of them in a casual way that it was a very beautiful day. No one was certain if he was referring to the state of the weather. Many people coincided in recalling that it was a radiant morning with a sea breeze coming in through the banana groves, as was to be expected in a fine February of that period. But most agreed that the weather was funereal, with a cloudy, low sky and the thick smell of still waters, and that at the moment of the misfortune a thin drizzle was falling like the one Santiago Nasar had seen in his dream grove” (2).
Various aspects of this quote are quite interesting. First of all Gabriel uses a simile to compare Santiago Nasar's death to being carved up like a pig. The audience gets a very graphic and descriptive image of his death right at the start of the story. Normally putting the climax at the start of the story would be weird expect this is magical realism which often has the aspect of a distorted timeline. It also is strange how the words text me off very unemotional. It seems that writing about an event such as this one would bring out many emotions, but it's almost like the narrator accepts that this happened and doesn't have a problem with it. The narrator is at least taking a non biased stance. Next the narrator talks about the perceptions of the weather. Although it is somewhat confusing what else he would be referring to other than the weather when he says it’s a beautiful day. One of the axioms is that it’s never just rain. The axiom is quite evident in the text. Many remembered it was a radiant morning the day of the murder because it is supposed to emphasize how the murder was not an event that would overtake the rest of the day. It gives the impression that in this culture it was almost accepted as a nearly normal day. Although others said it was cloudy which gives the impression that they noticed the event, because if the event was a tragedy there would be a storm and just clouds. It also only just drizzle during his death. This seems quite non dramatic.
What was your thoughts on his description being sleepy? A character being described as sleepy is mostly uncommon and to me, yet emphisised the idea of a casual morning. Being sleepy is a common morning feeling many can relate to that isn't out of the norm. However he didn't look nervous or frightened, so many should have inferred he didn't know about the plot.
One thing I found interesting in chapter 1 of “Chronicle of a Death Foretold”, is all the symbolism, especially with birds. We discussed in class the maxim of ‘flight is freedom’, and it has appeared in many works of literature. “Chronicle of a Death Foretold” is no exception. However, the maxim presents itself in a different way than usually seen; it’s portrayed as almost a symbol for death. Santiago Nasar’s dream is described as, “…he was happy in his dream, but when he awoke he felt completely spattered with bird shit’” (Garcia-Marquez 1). Here, Garcia-Marquez uses vulgar diction to truly drive his point home about birds being signifigant. Another dream was, “…he was alone in a tinfoil airplane” (1). Both of these quotes reference flight, or birds of some sort, setting up the ‘flight is freedom’ maxim. Nasar had these dreams in the days leading up to his death, suggesting that they were something akin to an omen, much like the trees the narrator mentions. Flight may be freedom, but freedom has a different interpretation in “Chronicle of a Death Foretold”; death. Death in a way is freedom from the world, a world in which Santiago Nasar is falsely accused of rape and the subject of scrutiny from a community that he was previously loved in. The symbolism of birds, and the maxim of ‘flight is freedom’ shows that freedom can sometimes be found in death. It will be interesting to see the evolution of the bird as a symbol throughout the course of the book.
I also saw frequent connections to the maxim "flight is freedom". Do you think that the dreams Santiago had that led up to his death were foreshadowing? He was happy when he was asleep, however he awoke to a very different feeling with the bird. This could possibly allude to the fact that he was oblivious to his planned death the whole time
“The last image his mother had of him was his fleeting passage through the bedroom. He’d wake her while feeling around trying to find aspirin in the bathroom medicine chest, and she turned on the light and saw him appear in the doorway with a glass of water in his hand” (Marquez, 6)
Marques early in The Chronicles of a Death Foretold already shares the last image Santiago Nasar's mother had of Santiago Nasar before his death. This already shows the title is misleading and is not really a chronicle. I believe that Marquez does this on purpose to show the confusion in which people thought Santiago was dead already. Therefore, his death wasn't in told in chronological order in the view of eyewitnesses during this time because some people would think that Santiago Nasar had already died when clearly as another evidence supports it died yet. For instance, the last line of chapter one about Santiago Nasar was “Don't bother yourself Luisa Santiaga…. they've already killed him” (Marquez, 24).. Also, in this quote what I found interesting was the description of Santiago's mother last image of her son. With him rushing to find aspirin to make him feel better while his mother just watches foreshadows that Santiago did everything in his will to make himself feel better and have good health which foreshadows that nobody in Santiago Nasar's surroundings did do as much as they could to prevent his death.
In the second chapter, there is an obvious change in focus. Marquez shows the side of women in the time period as powerless and under the dominance of men. I can connect this to other novels we have read this year as well, including “Taming of the Shrew”, “A Doll’s House”. Reading these pieces of literature in a row makes me realize the depth of how terrible the situation was for women before modern day. When Angela does not wish to marry Bayardo, her justification is that she is not in love with him. This seems as though it would be a very sufficient reason, as today one does not have to marry when they are not in love (in most cases). The response her mother gave her made me think about the situation from two different perspectives, mainly dealing with various cultures I have experienced in my life. She told her, “Love can be learned too"(35). At first glance, this quote made me angry as her mother was not letting her daughter have a choice in the situation. However, I began thinking about arranged marriages and noticed that more often than not, those marriages work out better than meeting someone, falling in love, then proceeding to get married. This is because they learned to love each other. Her mother may know that this is best decision for her daughter. Marquez seems to emphasize this dilemma to show what life was like for women back then, but was the forced marriage necessarily a bad thing as it is still seen today?
So far, all the books we have read this year have had a highly conservative social air, and “Chronicle of a Death Foretold” is no exception. First of all, Santiago Nasar was killed because of an infringement on a woman’s honor. Women were not supposed to draw attention to themselves, nor were they to try to find a husband for themselves. The narrator says, “It was hard for her to convince her parents that she hadn’t given Bayard San Román any reason to send her a gift like that, and even worse, in such a visible way that it hadn’t gone unnoticed by anyone” (32). This quote demonstrates the inequality females faced during this time period. Angela Vicario has to convince her parents that the gift she was given wasn’t provoked by her in any way. She was also looked down upon for her gift being delivered publicly, something that could potentially be a scandal.
This quote also shows the Spanish machismo mentioned in the packet: men felt an excessive need to protect the women, even if it was at the women’s expense. Pedro and Pablo Vicario, the two men who murdered Nasar are especially protective of their sister, and they returned her gift almost immediately.
These are some really interesting points you brought up. I definitely agree with your idea that the women were forced to be reserved, like property that was taken care of by the men. I also noticed how not just Angela displays these “innocent” traits, as all the female characters are treated as objects that are meant to be married and start a family. I think that gift from Bayardo was also a great example seeing how the people in the town considered this gift such a big deal, however nowadays most people would give it a second thought. I think that Marquez’s goal in characterizing the women in the story this way is to not only be accurate to the time period, 1950s Columbia, but also to demonstrate how women were heavily objectified any lacked any real rights or protections. These women were simply at the will of their male relatives.
In chapter 3, we see the first distinctions between the two Vicario brothers. In the first two chapters, they’re seen as a unit, but now we see how Pablo and Pedro differ. The narrator says, “Pablo Vicario was six minutes older than his brother, and he was the more imaginative and resolute until adolescence. Pedro Vicario always seemed more sentimental to me, and by the same token more authoritarian” (68). Even despite Pedro’s stint in the military, “Pablo Vicario had confirmed several times to me that it hadn’t been easy for him to convince his brother of their final resolve” (69). No matter the resolve though, Santiago Nasar still ended up in the ground. The significance of the Vicario brothers’ differences is that it shows two things: the spanish machismo ideal, and that you don’t have to be a monster to commit a crime. The theme of Spanish machismo is important in how all the men act throughout the book. There’s a pervading idea that men have to live up to expectations, even if they’re not so great, such as the murder of another man. The Vicario brothers are so different in times of stress, but they end at the same point. Pedro is more sentimental, and but he still helped to viciously murder Nasar.
Madeline, I found your analysis of the significance of the differences between the Vicario brothers very intriguing. It's interesting that the difference between the two would actually reveal Spanish machismo ideal and convey the theme of men living up to expectations. It's also interesting that at the end of the day they both committed the same crime and there in the point despite their differences. I do have a question, however, and that is, do you think their difference had any role in the killing, for instance because Pedro is more sentimental than Pablo, Pedro is more susceptible to fall under Pablo opinions, therefore, it allowed the killing. I ask this because it seems like at this point killing Nasar was a duty to both them more than just an opinion that may or may not had influenced each other.
In chapter 2, I notice that Angela's family values that the daughter should be granted with a husband that they like, can support the wife, and have money. Since Bayardo is constantly giving gifts to Angela he is demonstrates how rich he is and how much he is willing to spend on Angela. I also notice that in order for Angela to marry someone it must be approved by the parents and the parents must have a chance to meet with the husband. Essentially understanding the background of the husband is vital so the daughter won't marry someone who is a disappointment to the family and doesn't have much money. However Angela doesn't want to marry Bayardo and because of social pressure she does marry which might demonstrate the social pressure of the time. This might be the cause why the death of Santiago Nasar was not prevented because of the idea that what society thinks of something and individual must follow.
“She quickened her step, with the determination she was capable of when there was a life at stake, until somebody who was running in the opposite direction took pity on her madness. “Don’t bother yourself Luisa Santiaga,” he shouted as he went by. “They’ve already killed him.””
I found this section, these quotes particularly fascinating. It seems so odd to me that people would be so at ease knowing about this man’s death. People are running around enjoying themselves like it is no big deal that a death was taken, and maybe during this time period, this was normal and common, nothing new. Yet to use the words, “took pity on her madness” seems particularly cryptic. This is a woman filled with grief, hoping to find her friend or her Godson. She wanted to warn her friend of her son’s doom but this man shouted at her not to waste her time, as if visiting a friend who’s son was killed, or to be killed was a waste of time. Why would the man assume she was mad? It causes me to question the society they lived in because I can’t come to wrap my head around the idea that no one really cares about Nasser's life, his family, etc, but would go to a new lengths, to call someone who did care, mad? In modern day culture if someone passes away, the human thing to do is to console the family and respect the dead, within this culture, they ignore the dead and move on. The story line then cuts off. The page does not share whether Lusia continues on or gives up, this adds to the foreshadowing along with creating what I believe will be dramatic irony. I have a feeling that Luisa could have infact made a difference if she had continued on, but the fact that Nasser does die, makes me think she does not.
When I read chapter 3 I learned more about the Vicario twins that how they value honor. Especially with this quote “... While his brother agonized, drop by drop, trying to urinate under the tamarind trees” later says when talking about wrapping gauze “but this was something so different and so puzzling for Pablo Vicario that he interpreted it as some new trick on this brothers… So he put the knife in his hand and dragged him off almost but force in search of their sisters lost honor” (pg. 61). This quote demonstrates the extent in which at least, Pablo, is willing to defend his sister's honor. Marques describes this pain vividly and makes it sound very painful which it is. This represents how Pablo doesn't care about what Pedro is going through and is still willing to defend his sister's honor. He would drag Pedro even though is already in pain which shows his determination. This quote slight disconnect between the brothers which is quite interesting because before the narrator was just saying how they notice differences between the twins.
I haven't taken a close look at this quote prior to you blogging about it. I looked it up in the book and found the context of the quote and the whole passage is about how Pablo was very committed and Pedro questioned their actions. This brings up the question of how important was honor. If one of the brothers wasn't automatically ready to kill for honor was it truly that widely accepted. If their family was really so disrespected then wouldn't Pedro be on board from the second he found out. It kinda puts a whole in the whole idea that the whole honor killing was super acceptable beyond quotations. Perhaps this shows it was only mildly accepted. It’s also interesting how Pablo kinda forces Pedro to commit the crime. Maybe it is because Pablo feels Pedro is lost and needs guidance or is he just forcing him to do something he doesn't want to do.
Chapters Two and Three of Gabriel Garcia Marquez’s “Chronicle of a Death Foretold” are the real “meat” of the story as the audience watches as the events of the morning of Nasar’s death unfold. Marquez uses a myriad of powerful literary devices to build up the suspense and show how little the witnesses of his death really had known. The most striking device was Marquez’s use of disjointed and disconnected recounts of the events of the morning. As the narrator mentions the recollections of the townspeople, the reader sees how their stories differ in every facet, from Santiago Nasar’s clothes to the weather for that morning. Another interesting part of these two chapters were the Vicario brothers preparations to kill the man they believe stole their sister’s “honor”. As they parade through the town preparing themselves mentally and physically they mention to several people that they were going to kill Santiago, but not a single person out if this group decided to go and give Nasar a warning or even get the authorities. Finally, the audience also learns if some social insight into rural Columbia in this time period. Unlike other nations, women were much less independent and were still bargained away like livestock rather than being treated with the respect a human deserves. This is apparent through the plot point where she is returned home on the night of her wedding because her groom thought she had lost her chastity and felt he couldn't marry her because of this fact, even though it was known by the women in this time that were ways to lose the marker of your chastity without being with another person.
In chapter 3, the focus changes once again to the view of the twin brothers. The more I read of the chapter, the more sorrow i felt for the twins. It seemed as though the two were boldly announcing they were going to kill Santiago hoping for someone to stop them. It was a plea of help that went unanswered and eventually led to a death. In some way, the twins could have felt that the rest of the family, especially Angela, expected them to do something about the situation and to get revenge. If they didn’t do anything, they would seem dishonorable. This was very interesting to me because I can compare their time period to ours, where turning the other cheek would be the admirable thing to do today. They simply needed someone to stop them, however the Colonel does try this in the chapter. He “took away their knives and sent them to sleep” (53). After this, the twins went again to buy more knives and proceeded with their plan. There was an evident attempt at stopping them, however the twins did not listen. This leads the the question, what would it have taken to actually stop them? What kind of obligation were they looking for? In the end, they seemed to have no other choice but to follow through with the act and stay true to their duty. This shows just how much influence a culture and family honor can have on a small town.
I too felt sorry for the twins while reading this chapter aswell. As Clotilde Armenta said, "They looked like two children,"(55). I too had begun to feel as if the boys were either trying to get attention, yet I couldn't decide if it was to get someone to stop them, or to get someone to encourage them. It was quite an odd passage. To me, It felt as though the boys, if fact, had not wanted to kill Nasser, but fate had brought them to do it anyway.
In Chapter 4 of “Chronicle of a Death Foretold”, we see Angela Vicario many years after the death of Santiago Nasar, and the two sides of her character. The first example is when the narrator running into Angela Vicario. The narrator says, “At the window of a house that faced the sea, embroidering by machine during the hottest hour of the day, was a woman half in mourning, with steel-rimmed glasses and yellowish gray hair, and hanging above her head was a cage with a canary that didn’t stop singing” (102). The color yellow is mentioned or implied twice in this quote, showing it as a symbol. Yellow can often symbolize happiness, and optimism, but it can also symbolize cowardice and deceit. Both meanings of the color are evident in Angela Vicario. She deceived the whole town, and wrongfully put Santiago Nasar to his death, but she has also found peace with herself, and has settled down with Bayardo San Román. This quote really shows two sides of Angela, and that even despite the many years of time that have passed, both optimism for the future, and the deceit of the past live on inside her.
Another example of this duality is when Angela realizes she is falling for Bayardo. Garcia-Marquez writes, “Mistress of her fate for the first time, Angela Vicario then discovered that hate and love are reciprocal passions. The more letters she sent the more the coals of her fever burned, but the happy rancor she felt for her mother also heated up” (108). Here, vivid imagery and fiery diction is used to really drive home the point of Angela having two sides, each with equal vigor. In chapter 4, we see Angela’s character many years after Santiago Nasar’s murder, with both happiness for her present and future, while still carrying her cowardice of the past in the symbolism of the color yellow.
In Chapter 5 of “Chronicle of a Death Foretold”, the reader is lead to believe that Santiago Nasar was completely innocent of taking Angela Vicario’s virginity, and was killed wrongfully. This is first shown when, “at the conclusion of his excessive diligence was not having found a single clue, not even the most improbable, that Santiago Nasar had been the cause of the wrong” (116, 117). This quote seems hyperbolic, but it is indeed factual. There was no proof, so Nasar must have been innocent. This book being a ‘chronicle’ really comes out in chapter 5 as well. The book tells of everyone’s accounts of the story, yet they all end with the same outcome. The final chapter focuses on those closest to Santiago. Nasir Miguel, a close friend, says, “‘From the first moment I understood that he didn’t have the slightest idea of what I was saying’…Then he asked him outright if he knew that the Vicario brothers were looking for him to kill him…He agreed that his manner reflected not so much fear as confusion” (135). This mixing of perspectives in the quote from both the narrator and Nahir Miguel adds to the idea that Nasar was not at fault. So many people claim he genuinely had no idea he was going to be killed, and was thoroughly confused at their claims. Overall, hyperboles, and the use of multiple perspectives adds to the audience believing Santiago was innocent of taking Angela’s honor.
I really like how you found that quote that supports the whole argument that he is innocent, but didn't seem like the police force was very extensive. I doubt they looked into the case very thoroughly, and just because no clue was found doesn't prove he is not guilty. On the other hand I also found it interesting how you talk about the various perspectives of the charters and how they helps to develop the story. Also even if he didn't know he was going to die I don't really think that can prove he was innocent. Nobody told him that it was going to happen, and it's not like if was was doing that he would always be looking over his shoulder thinking the brothers might try to kill him.
Baylor, I agree with your analysis that Santiago is not 100% innocent, however do you believe he deserved the punishment he recieved? Even if he was not innocent and he took her virginity, did he deserve to be murdered?
Throughout chapter 4, there were many references to smell. The smells referenced to may correlate with the sense of guilt that the town feels after Santiago’s death after not doing anything to prevent it, "No matter how much I scrubbed with soap and rags, I couldn't get rid of the smell" (78). Although the smell of a person can stay past their death for some time, the townspeople claimed they could still smell Santiago weeks after he had passed, leading me to believe they were feeling guilty as they could not get him out of their heads. Many people in the town had an opportunity to take action against the twins and prevent the death, however as none of them did, the entire town felt responsible for his death. I believe they were justified to feel this way because by not saying anything, they helped the brothers with their mission. The reason Marquez added the smell that the people of the town “could not get rid of” is to give insight into human nature. People naturally feel guilt when their actions have a negative outcome for someone else, especially something as large as death. Marquez may be trying to convey that they needed to take the threat more seriously, because at the end of the day everyone needs to live their actions.
This is a very interesting a unique idea. I haven't thought about how Marquez utilized the smells in Chronicle of a Death Foretold to convey the idea of guilt. However, I do agree with you as the use of smell, especially immediately after Santiago’s death. The most noticeable example is when the narrator goes to comfort a naked woman, but she refuses to sleep with him because he smells like Santiago. I think that here the idea of Nasar’s lingering smell is not only indicative of the guilt that many members of the town feels for failing to warn this fairly well respected man about the dangers that awaited him before his murder. However, I also think that it is symbolic of the idea of consequences, as although Santiago is dead and that part of the story is over. His odor still reminds those of what had happened and their failure to act on that day.
In chapter 5, most of the characters make it seems as though they could not have prevented the death, although in the previous chapter is was made very obvious they were feeling guilt about the situation. I found it interesting that the narrator is writing this novel as factual, and trying his hardest to find out the facts of the investigation. However, he portrays them through magical realism. This leads to my question, why would a murder investigation novel based on factual evidence be told using magical realism? Wouldn't this simply make the story less believable? At this point in the novel, with all the bits and pieces coming together, I began to question whether the fact that Santiago’s death was foretold became the reason it happened. If the twins had said “We might kill Santiago Nasar” would the outcome have been different? Once things are said, are they set in stone? I also saw a recurring theme of fate. The judge was disturbed that he had to write a brief about the death that he did not fully comprehend, "Most of all, he never thought it legitimate that life should make use of so many coincidences forbidden literature, so that there should be the untrammeled fulfillment of a death so clearly foretold" (116)
“They burst panting into the parish house, closely pursued by a group of roused-up Arabs, and they laid the knives, with clean blades, on Father Amador's desk. Both were exhausted from the barbarous work of death, and their clothes and arms were soaked and their faces smeared with sweat and still living blood, but the priest recalled the surrender as an act of great dignity. "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 honour"“ (29)
The actions of the Vicario brothers give the impression that they believe they are innocent to the audience. They lay weapons down as a symbol of retirement from their behavior, but not as a sign of guilt. The Father says “ perhaps before God” to send the message that perhaps due to the religious belief that women should be virgins before they are married it was ok. Although what he says does not send the impressions that he believes it was was the best choice of action. While the brothers end the impression to the audience with a guiltless tone that they believe that they are innocent before everyone because their culture supports the revenge/ honor killing of Santiago Nasar. The Imagery of the brothers is also quite interesting. Thier description begins with the strong phrase, “exhausted from the barbarous work of death”. The phrase gives of a really deep sense of darkness and despair that really impacts the reader's impression of the brothers. They are then described as covered in blood, as well as some living blood. This also helps create a gruesome dark image of the brothers as it seems like they don't care they just took a man's life. Finally it is quote interesting how the Father can find dignity in the act of surrendering because he clearly states later that they are only innocent in the eyes of God. So it seems as if he should be disgusted by them no matter what. perhaps he sees them through the eyes of God
“For the immense majority of people there was only one victim: Bayardo San Roman. 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. Santiago Nasar had expiated the insult, the brothers Vicario had proved their status as men, and the seduced sister was in possession of her honor once more. The only one who had lost everything was Bayardo San Roman: "poor Bayardo," as he was remembered over the years” (49).
At first this statement can be confusing to the American reader due to cultural conflicts. The strong influence of the celtic church affects the morals of the society. It is very bad for the bride to be deflowered before her wedding. In their eyes this justifies their actions. While Americans have moved passed a combination of church and state or something similar. Americans have adopted the ideology that those wrong doers will be arrested and prosecuted under the law by the government. After taking a step back the reader can see how in the eyes of their culture Bayardo San Roman is the victim. He chose a wife believing she was a virgin but found out she waste which was highly frowned upon in their culture. The only way for the brothers to regain their honor was to kill Santiago Nasar. Now in the eyes of the reader this may seem radical, but based off of the majority of the people believing Bayardo San Roman was the victim it can be determined that their culture believes otherwise. It is also quite disturbing to the reader how the people refer to Bayardo San Roman as “poor Bayardo” the only man who lost everything. The people come of with a sympathetic tone which seems quite strange since since Santiago Nasar lost his life. Most would agree that a life is worth more than a man's marriage. Perhaps the beliefs of their culture differs when concerning the value of a life.
Twelve days after the crime, the investigating magistrate came upon a town that was an open wound. In the squalid wooden office in the town hall, drinking pot coffee laced with cane liquor against the mirages of the heat, he had to ask for troop reinforcements to control the crowd that was pouring in to testify without having been summoned, everyone eager to show off his own important role in the drama.
To start the twelves days could have some significance. During the Medieval times the twelfth day of christmas symbolized the end of winter. Similarity the whole fiasco around the death is starting to die down. In both cases a dark sad time is being put in the past. Yet there are still some days of cold left. On the contrary the metaphor about the town being an open wound. This gives the reader the impression that the problem is alive and well. An open wound can still get infected and become worse. An open wound also gives the impression that it is a large wound that will take a long time to heal. This can be seen in the description of people later in their lives who are still damaged. On the other hand it could be a smaller wound that people will forget in a couple months. People worry about the current cut they have on their body but the scar can always be seen from previous damage. The scars effect Bayardo San Roman and Angela the most by far. It is also quite interesting how everyone wants to be important in the case. It is similar to the doll’s house in which everyone is very conscious of their self image and importance. The reader gets the impression that the people care more about being involved than actually care about the people who were damaged by the event. It also seems like the magistrate is trying to show off his power by asking for troop reinforcements
In chapter 3 of Marquez unique novel. The audience witnesses the buildup and subsequent death of Santiago Nasar. Fresh off the information that Nasar was the man who “stole” Angela Vicario’s honor, the Vicario brothers decided to restore this lost honor by killing the man who took it. The brothers parade around the town, making preparations to kill Nasar. Although they clearly express their intent to kill him to several people in the town, no one truly takes preventative measures to stop this crime from playing over. Could it be because people secretly thought that Santiago deserved it? Or they didn't want to be the ones to make a big deal out of this situation if what the Vicario brothers promised were nothing more than idle threats. Their encounters include their time at the butcher’s shop sharpening their and the short conversation with the policeman. At the shop, the Vicario brothers tell the butcher that they plan to kill Santiago Nasar in order to restore their family’s honor. The butcher decides that they are still drunk from the wedding the previous night and dismisses these thoughts as the ramblings of crazy, drunk men. For this reason, he makes no effort to stop them. After, while the brothers walk around town, they bump into a policemen who upon hearing of what they plan to do, takes their knives away. The policeman is aware that they couldn't simply go get more knives, but he believes they don't truly intend to go through with this plan and simply confiscates their knives instead. Neither of the men who heard about the plans of Pablo and Pedro Vicario even bothered to warn Santiago that their were some in the village who intended to kill him.
This relates back to TOK, to what extent do we take a threat seriously. In CODF apparently nobody took this threat seriously. I like how you explore the various option to the way people think, which may be the cause of this murder occurring. The thought you had about people secretly not telling Santiago I found interesting. My question to you is, do you think we can spot these people, and if you do find them should there be any punishment for their belief? This because they knew Santiago was going to die but their beliefs sent them back in not telling so is this considered unethical based on human rights?
““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.” (49)
I found this chapter of Chronicles of a Death Foretold, by Gabriel Marquez quite interesting. Knowing their justifications for murder seem odd to me. In elementary school, I attended a catholic school for about two years. Being there I learned a lot, about the catholic religion. One thing I know Catholics do is repent. You walk up to a pastor in a weird box and tell him of all your sins. He will then forgive you and give you a specific number of “hail mary's” you must do to wipe yourself clean. When Father Amador, says, “perhaps before God, he is implying confession, the cleansing of your sins. You may have confessed in secret but you still committed murder. Pedro not only openly admits fault, but goes on to say that they are innocent even though they took a life because it was for honor. Amador’s quote proves that during the time period, many Catholics felt they could do whatever they thought was necessary as long as repented. They believed God had forgiven them for murder and that their peers and justice system should to. The make the claim that this was out of honor. The twins also sound as if they expect the priest to agree with them, that as long as it’s out of honor that murder was committed, all is well. So when thinking about weather honor justifies a solution, you must put the story into context of its time and moral values. The Vicario brothers obviously felt that they were doing the right thing and should be forgiven all out of honor emphasizing how important honor was at this point. Rather than the present day American Dream, of money, love, and happiness, their emphasis and stress was on honor, even though some, their sister, didn’t see honor as a code to live by.
“The body had been exposed to the public view in the center of the living room, lying on a narrow iron cot while they were building a rich man’s coffin for it. They brought fans from the bedrooms and some neighboring house, but there were so many people anxious to see it that they had to push back the furniture and take down the bird cages and pots of ferns, and even the the heat was unbearable.” 73 This passage lead me to be curious about the culture of the dead within their society. Is this, cramming in many people to see a dead corps on the table, common for their society, or did many people go out of their way to see the dead body after all the rumors. The fact that the family approved of this, Santiago’s mom, leads me to believe this is infact common for the time period. I don't believe that his mom would have been willing to show her dead son to all of those who knew he was to be killed and just waited, if it wasn't common for the time period. However this detail was sickening to me. Within the tone of the words, it’s uncomfortable and it makes perfect sense why it would be incredibly hot as well. For many staring at Santiago, it was an uncomfortable situation. The tone came off as uncomfortable for me due to the fact I felt once again Santiago was being taken advantage of. He didn’t deserve to be viewed the way he was, remembered bloody, cold, and dead in a room that was way too hot. The next section even goes on to say that dogs began to show up because of the smell, the heat, and the decomposition of the body. Allowing the town to see this process, for me, seemed disrespectful. In my opinion, this moment took away his honor. However, this moment did go full circle and it was ironic that the town was first to know that he was to be killed, and the town was able to see him dead. This moment emphasized the town’s importance as a whole, the town, within this story held all the power. There was all this potential energy that no one seized out of fear, revenge, or lack of care. It was quite ironic that the town was not only holding his life, but also manipulating his death by taking control of the house.
I think you brought up some great points on how odd the public display of Santiago Nasar’s death affected the town and the reader’s perception of the now deceased protagonist. I would like to add that the permeating smell of the course also adds to the overall underlying sense of guilt that the townspeople feel, as they struggle to forget about him when his odor seems to encompass the town. For instance we see how Maria refuses to sleep with the narrator simply because he smells of Nasar. Another example of this is when the Vicario brothers are able to recognize the malodorous smell of Santiago decomposing body and quickly become sick after the fact.
In Chapter 4 of this interesting story, the reader finds some insights into how the town reacted to a murder. They are shown who is victimized and who is villi snoozed and how gender plays a big role in it. In the aftermath of the murder. Pablo and Pedro and arrested and thrown in jail. Meanwhile Santiago’s corpse undergoes an seemingly needless autopsy when being hastily buried to hide the sub par work of the coroner. The rest of the Vicario family attempts to save face, and also decides to move to Manuera. The audience sees the deceptive actions of the pass continue as Angela wears face coverings to hide the bruises caused by her mother’s beatings and dresses in red, an effort to hide that fact that she is mourning for her recently deceased lover. However the real victim in the eyes of the townspeople is Bayardo San Roman who is pitied for “losing” his wonderful bride. We see how although Angela did the honorable thing by not lying and was beaten, she doesn't received the same sympathy that San Roman does. The reader also sees a glimpse into the future as the narrator reveals what happens to the Vicario brothers after their crime, and what happens to Angela after the fact. In addition, the narrator talks about the Arab community in this town and how they are peaceful people who wouldn't seek revenge for killing “one of theirs”. This chapter provides incredible insight into what happens to the characters and how it has affected their lives.
I agree with your interpretation. Both Chapters 4 and 5 do a really nice job of wrapping up how the character's react to the death, and how they go about living their lives after a huge event. I really like your point about gender roles as well. I definitely agree that men and women were treated differently, especially in grief. The consequences they both faced were a product of the time period: Angela is treated as an outcast for not upholding her virginity, while Bayardo is pitied because his wife didn't hold up hers. It is implied that Bayardo has had previous lovers as well, yet he is not shunned for having premarital sex.
“Under that paraphrase of discouragement, in a merry sketch with the same blood ink, he drew a heart pierced by an arrow. For him, just as for Santiago Nasar's closest friends, the victim's very behavior during his last night was overwhelming proof of his innocence.”
I chose this quote because I thought that it was quite interesting that the investigator sympathized with Nasar when no one else did. Not only did the investigator, he knew the truth, that Nasar had been wrongfully accused, but no one could do anything about it. Similar to how no one could have prevented Nasar's death. It emphasis the idea of wrong doing on the front of the report, but inside presents the idea that of fate, that no matter what happened, Nasar would end up dead and would be labeled as taking Angela's virginity. I found the detail about the heart with an arrow quite intriguing. Thinking about the heart, it portrays a sad tone. A tone of grief and regret. The small heart, for me, leaves me with an image in my mind. The way the heart was drawn is open to your own perspective, but the fact that the detail about the heart being drawn in memory leaves me with a feeling of frustration and remorse for Nasar and his family, who the heart was drawn for. This little symbol speaks a lot to a pull away message because this little heart will be Nw commonly remembered for me, and every time I see a heart with an arrow, I will think of Santiago and the wrong committed against him. Santiago’s death may not have been avoidable, and Santiago may not have been admired by many, but this little heart drawn shows that someone cared, and will care. It’s proof that Santiago Nasar will be remembered.
I definitely agree with your ideas on Marquez’s use of this quote, it is quite an interesting idea. I would also like to mention that the violent diction, indicted by the use of words like “blood” and “arrow” set a dark and morbid tone and give the reader a feeling for the grave and serious nature of the events of the story. In addition, it becomes apparent how the use of the word “arrow” is appropriate as Santiago is killed by another person, just as one would be by an arrow through the heart. For instance we see how Maria refuses to sleep with the narrator simply because he smells of Nasar. Another example of this is when the Vicario brothers are able to recognize the malodorous smell of Santiago decomposing body and quickly become sick after the fact.
In Chapter 5 of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, the haziness and lack of clarity is seemingly expunged as the narrator provides the reader with information that no longer competes with one another or lacks validity. In this chapter the information of Santiago Nasar’s death comes from those that remember it vividly and as though it happened recently, while also talking more about how the town handled the situation. For years after Santiago's death, nobody could stop talking about it. Many people just couldn't deal with the guilt. Some people died from the guilt or went insane, like Don Rogelio de la Flor. When an investigative magistrate is sent to the town, he's overwhelmed with the number of people who want to testify about their part in the murder.There is a trial and it only lasts three days, but the biggest mystery is how Santiago got involved in this whole ordeal. No one believes that he and Angela had a relationship, and that his behavior would have been a little too inconspicuous for a man who knew he was about to be murdered. Everyone in town knows that the Vicario brothers are plotting to kill Santiago, but instead of doing anything to stop them, they stand in the square watching like it is some sort or spectacle to behold. It seems strange that such a well respected and loved man would receive no warning or notification from this community about his impending murder, and that even during the act, no one tried to help him, as he simply stumbles into his kitchen and dies.
In chapter 4, I found it interesting how Angela began to write letters to Bayardo. I also can't believe that she did this for about seventeen years. Bayardo then comes in august to her workplace the a suitcase of upon letters from her and another with his clothes. This is interesting because it gets away from the plot if the story which is revolved around Santiago Nasar's death. The reason why I find the interesting is because the letters that Angela send could be anything, and, in fact, it could reveal whether she truly did have premarital sex with Santiago.It makes me question why Marquez felt it necessary to include this when it didn’t have to do anything with Santiago's Nasar murder. Also the notion that these are love letters tells us more about the relationship between Angela and Bayardo. It seems like instead of Bayardo going got agree the roles had switched and now Angela is going for Bayardo. It is also interesting that Bayardo did not open. I think the deepens their love in their relationship because just the simple arrival of love letters and not the content of the love letters attracted Bayardo. With this thought, I believe the reason why Bayardo waited so long was because he wanted to see Angela true love.
Chapter 5 revealed the communities wronging in not taking action to the situation but instead just simply watching and see what happens next. Due to this Santiago was confused towards the end so when his father told him that the Vicario brothers wanted to kill he didn't understand because it was the first time hearing the news. what I thought at least with the given information from Marquez. It is also interesting in which Marquez builds up to the conclusion. It's anticlimactic because just before the end he talks about how Santiago is innocence leading us to believe that the answer to this chronicle will finally be revealed to the reader, but in reality, it just reveals the how Santiago Nasar died in his kitchen. I believe what this tell us is that because there is no conclusion/answer to whether Angela actually lost her virginity to danger. It just a ritual. Like with the town, when a bad thing happens people think the other person will do something about it. Marquez is telling us that this struggle happens every day and there isn't an answer because people want the answer to come to them when in reality you have to go and find the answer either by action, exploring or any way, but not just being a spectator and wait for something the expected to happen which is receiving the answer.
I definitely agree with your interpretation of this quote. The idea of women being helpless also ties into the theme of Spanish machismo present throughout the novella. Men are seen to be as the protectors of the weak and helpless, to almost an absurd degree. The Vicario brothers were willing to murder a man to defend their sister, someone who they believed to be helpless, as shown in the quote you mentioned.
Although the brothers felt they needed to do this for their family honor, do you think this justified their actions? The women never fully expressed a want for this to occur, everything was very assumed. This may indicate that the brothers wanted to do it for themselves to some extent as they did not ask what Angela wanted to happen
Chapter One of the novel Chronicle of a Death Foretold sets the scene for an intriguing tale to come. The first few pages allude to the death of Santiago Nasar. The narrator seems to construct a timeline around Nasar’s pending death, stating, “... he’d described to her on the mornings preceding his death.”(Marquez 4) and, “...until the Monday of his death”(Marquez 7), which show the serious of events in the novel revolve around an event that has yet to come in the story but has already happened in the past. (A fact that is indicted by the narrator’s use of past tense) Furthermore, we she the emotions of the event through the fond recollections of Nasar’s mother, as she says, “‘He was the man in my life.’” The reader gains some insight into the emotional impact of Nasar’s impending death and how it impacted the people around. This is have the effect of giving a certain level of weight to such an important event. The reader also witnesses a case of irony as the narrator gives into detail about Santiago Nasar’s well proliferated firearms collection, an accumulation of useless weapons as we know that these will not save him from death. The weather in the first chapter is heavily used to portray the flimsiness of the anecdotal accounts, as the different citizens of the town have vastly different recollections of what the weather was like on the morning of Nasar’s death and whether or not it happened to be raining.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteIn the first chapter of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, I noticed that the author mentions the weather many times, "... funereal, with a cloudy, low sky and the thick smell of still waters..." (4). By using the word funeral, Marquez foreshadows the death of Santiago. He uses harsh and saddened nature imagery to convey the tone of despair, as his death is soon approaching. I also found it interesting that the color of Santiago’s clothing was white, as white usually stands for purity and hope. These were the clothes that he was killed in, they may be a symbol that he was very innocent in the act and did not deserve what he had coming. I also noticed a lot of animal imagery. One that caught my interest was the mentioning of a rooster. The Bishop’s boat makes the roosters start to crow which also “arouses all the other roosters in town.” (16) Roosters crowing is an ordinary event, however every single rooster in town crowing would not occur in the real life. Marquez may have added this miniscule event in the story to represent a form of magical realism, and that magic exists in everything such as everyday occurrences, even if it’s not naked to the eye.
March 1, 2016
ReplyDelete“Remembered him as being a little sleepy but in a good mood, and he remarked to all of them in a casual way that it was a very beautiful day. No one was certain if he was referring to the state or the weather. Many people coincided in recalling that it was a radiant morning with a sea breeze coming in through the banana groves, as was to be expected in a fine February of that period.” (4)
I found the start of this story to be rather intriguing with a tone that felt cold and off putting. The language is plane without much emotion although there's quite a lot of imagery, for example, “sea breeze coming through the banana groves” is both tactile and visual imagery. Looking at the bright diction within this passage, “radiant morning”,”beautiful weather”, and “sea breeze”, you expect the tone to be lighter hearted. However the language and formation of sentences creates a translation that is rather robotic and uncomfortable for the readers. I believe this is due to the sophisticated and upfront diction of verbs such as coincided, recalling, was to be expected, etc. The romantic language is read in a choppy tone without an emotional grab which is quite odd for a introduction to a story.
The beginning of the story is also told in first person where the narrator is recalling events that are oddly specific, “sea breeze through the banana trees” or “no one was certain if he was referring to the state or the weather”. In modern day culture, when someone says, “it's a very beautiful day”, not much thought is put into it. It’s more of a greeting such as hello. In 2016, a greeting such as that would often be overlooked or agreed upon without being processed. The intense detail also begins the story for me on a bit of an off note due to the over- reading of the. simple greeting.
Cameron Kays
“Furthermore: all the many people he ran into after leaving his house at five minutes past six and until he was carved up like a pig an hour later remembered him as being a little sleepy but in a good mood, and he remarked to all of them in a casual way that it was a very beautiful day. No one was certain if he was referring to the state of the weather. Many people coincided in recalling that it was a radiant morning with a sea breeze coming in through the banana groves, as was to be expected in a fine February of that period. But most agreed that the weather was funereal, with a cloudy, low sky and the thick smell of still waters, and that at the moment of the misfortune a thin drizzle was falling like the one Santiago Nasar had seen in his dream grove” (2).
ReplyDeleteVarious aspects of this quote are quite interesting. First of all Gabriel uses a simile to compare Santiago Nasar's death to being carved up like a pig. The audience gets a very graphic and descriptive image of his death right at the start of the story. Normally putting the climax at the start of the story would be weird expect this is magical realism which often has the aspect of a distorted timeline. It also is strange how the words text me off very unemotional. It seems that writing about an event such as this one would bring out many emotions, but it's almost like the narrator accepts that this happened and doesn't have a problem with it. The narrator is at least taking a non biased stance.
Next the narrator talks about the perceptions of the weather. Although it is somewhat confusing what else he would be referring to other than the weather when he says it’s a beautiful day. One of the axioms is that it’s never just rain. The axiom is quite evident in the text. Many remembered it was a radiant morning the day of the murder because it is supposed to emphasize how the murder was not an event that would overtake the rest of the day. It gives the impression that in this culture it was almost accepted as a nearly normal day. Although others said it was cloudy which gives the impression that they noticed the event, because if the event was a tragedy there would be a storm and just clouds. It also only just drizzle during his death. This seems quite non dramatic.
What was your thoughts on his description being sleepy? A character being described as sleepy is mostly uncommon and to me, yet emphisised the idea of a casual morning. Being sleepy is a common morning feeling many can relate to that isn't out of the norm. However he didn't look nervous or frightened, so many should have inferred he didn't know about the plot.
DeleteOne thing I found interesting in chapter 1 of “Chronicle of a Death Foretold”, is all the symbolism, especially with birds. We discussed in class the maxim of ‘flight is freedom’, and it has appeared in many works of literature. “Chronicle of a Death Foretold” is no exception. However, the maxim presents itself in a different way than usually seen; it’s portrayed as almost a symbol for death. Santiago Nasar’s dream is described as, “…he was happy in his dream, but when he awoke he felt completely spattered with bird shit’” (Garcia-Marquez 1). Here, Garcia-Marquez uses vulgar diction to truly drive his point home about birds being signifigant. Another dream was, “…he was alone in a tinfoil airplane” (1). Both of these quotes reference flight, or birds of some sort, setting up the ‘flight is freedom’ maxim. Nasar had these dreams in the days leading up to his death, suggesting that they were something akin to an omen, much like the trees the narrator mentions. Flight may be freedom, but freedom has a different interpretation in “Chronicle of a Death Foretold”; death. Death in a way is freedom from the world, a world in which Santiago Nasar is falsely accused of rape and the subject of scrutiny from a community that he was previously loved in. The symbolism of birds, and the maxim of ‘flight is freedom’ shows that freedom can sometimes be found in death. It will be interesting to see the evolution of the bird as a symbol throughout the course of the book.
ReplyDeleteI also saw frequent connections to the maxim "flight is freedom". Do you think that the dreams Santiago had that led up to his death were foreshadowing? He was happy when he was asleep, however he awoke to a very different feeling with the bird. This could possibly allude to the fact that he was oblivious to his planned death the whole time
Delete“The last image his mother had of him was his fleeting passage through the bedroom. He’d wake her while feeling around trying to find aspirin in the bathroom medicine chest, and she turned on the light and saw him appear in the doorway with a glass of water in his hand” (Marquez, 6)
ReplyDeleteMarques early in The Chronicles of a Death Foretold already shares the last image Santiago Nasar's mother had of Santiago Nasar before his death. This already shows the title is misleading and is not really a chronicle. I believe that Marquez does this on purpose to show the confusion in which people thought Santiago was dead already. Therefore, his death wasn't in told in chronological order in the view of eyewitnesses during this time because some people would think that Santiago Nasar had already died when clearly as another evidence supports it died yet. For instance, the last line of chapter one about Santiago Nasar was “Don't bother yourself Luisa Santiaga…. they've already killed him” (Marquez, 24).. Also, in this quote what I found interesting was the description of Santiago's mother last image of her son. With him rushing to find aspirin to make him feel better while his mother just watches foreshadows that Santiago did everything in his will to make himself feel better and have good health which foreshadows that nobody in Santiago Nasar's surroundings did do as much as they could to prevent his death.
In the second chapter, there is an obvious change in focus. Marquez shows the side of women in the time period as powerless and under the dominance of men. I can connect this to other novels we have read this year as well, including “Taming of the Shrew”, “A Doll’s House”. Reading these pieces of literature in a row makes me realize the depth of how terrible the situation was for women before modern day. When Angela does not wish to marry Bayardo, her justification is that she is not in love with him. This seems as though it would be a very sufficient reason, as today one does not have to marry when they are not in love (in most cases). The response her mother gave her made me think about the situation from two different perspectives, mainly dealing with various cultures I have experienced in my life. She told her, “Love can be learned too"(35). At first glance, this quote made me angry as her mother was not letting her daughter have a choice in the situation. However, I began thinking about arranged marriages and noticed that more often than not, those marriages work out better than meeting someone, falling in love, then proceeding to get married. This is because they learned to love each other. Her mother may know that this is best decision for her daughter. Marquez seems to emphasize this dilemma to show what life was like for women back then, but was the forced marriage necessarily a bad thing as it is still seen today?
ReplyDeleteSo far, all the books we have read this year have had a highly conservative social air, and “Chronicle of a Death Foretold” is no exception. First of all, Santiago Nasar was killed because of an infringement on a woman’s honor. Women were not supposed to draw attention to themselves, nor were they to try to find a husband for themselves. The narrator says, “It was hard for her to convince her parents that she hadn’t given Bayard San Román any reason to send her a gift like that, and even worse, in such a visible way that it hadn’t gone unnoticed by anyone” (32). This quote demonstrates the inequality females faced during this time period. Angela Vicario has to convince her parents that the gift she was given wasn’t provoked by her in any way. She was also looked down upon for her gift being delivered publicly, something that could potentially be a scandal.
ReplyDeleteThis quote also shows the Spanish machismo mentioned in the packet: men felt an excessive need to protect the women, even if it was at the women’s expense. Pedro and Pablo Vicario, the two men who murdered Nasar are especially protective of their sister, and they returned her gift almost immediately.
These are some really interesting points you brought up. I definitely agree with your idea that the women were forced to be reserved, like property that was taken care of by the men. I also noticed how not just Angela displays these “innocent” traits, as all the female characters are treated as objects that are meant to be married and start a family. I think that gift from Bayardo was also a great example seeing how the people in the town considered this gift such a big deal, however nowadays most people would give it a second thought. I think that Marquez’s goal in characterizing the women in the story this way is to not only be accurate to the time period, 1950s Columbia, but also to demonstrate how women were heavily objectified any lacked any real rights or protections. These women were simply at the will of their male relatives.
DeleteIn chapter 3, we see the first distinctions between the two Vicario brothers. In the first two chapters, they’re seen as a unit, but now we see how Pablo and Pedro differ. The narrator says, “Pablo Vicario was six minutes older than his brother, and he was the more imaginative and resolute until adolescence. Pedro Vicario always seemed more sentimental to me, and by the same token more authoritarian” (68). Even despite Pedro’s stint in the military, “Pablo Vicario had confirmed several times to me that it hadn’t been easy for him to convince his brother of their final resolve” (69). No matter the resolve though, Santiago Nasar still ended up in the ground. The significance of the Vicario brothers’ differences is that it shows two things: the spanish machismo ideal, and that you don’t have to be a monster to commit a crime. The theme of Spanish machismo is important in how all the men act throughout the book. There’s a pervading idea that men have to live up to expectations, even if they’re not so great, such as the murder of another man. The Vicario brothers are so different in times of stress, but they end at the same point. Pedro is more sentimental, and but he still helped to viciously murder Nasar.
ReplyDeleteMadeline, I found your analysis of the significance of the differences between the Vicario brothers very intriguing. It's interesting that the difference between the two would actually reveal Spanish machismo ideal and convey the theme of men living up to expectations. It's also interesting that at the end of the day they both committed the same crime and there in the point despite their differences. I do have a question, however, and that is, do you think their difference had any role in the killing, for instance because Pedro is more sentimental than Pablo, Pedro is more susceptible to fall under Pablo opinions, therefore, it allowed the killing. I ask this because it seems like at this point killing Nasar was a duty to both them more than just an opinion that may or may not had influenced each other.
DeleteIn chapter 2, I notice that Angela's family values that the daughter should be granted with a husband that they like, can support the wife, and have money. Since Bayardo is constantly giving gifts to Angela he is demonstrates how rich he is and how much he is willing to spend on Angela. I also notice that in order for Angela to marry someone it must be approved by the parents and the parents must have a chance to meet with the husband. Essentially understanding the background of the husband is vital so the daughter won't marry someone who is a disappointment to the family and doesn't have much money. However Angela doesn't want to marry Bayardo and because of social pressure she does marry which might demonstrate the social pressure of the time. This might be the cause why the death of Santiago Nasar was not prevented because of the idea that what society thinks of something and individual must follow.
ReplyDeleteMarch 3, 2016
ReplyDelete“She quickened her step, with the determination she was capable of when there was a life at stake, until somebody who was running in the opposite direction took pity on her madness.
“Don’t bother yourself Luisa Santiaga,” he shouted as he went by. “They’ve already killed him.””
I found this section, these quotes particularly fascinating. It seems so odd to me that people would be so at ease knowing about this man’s death. People are running around enjoying themselves like it is no big deal that a death was taken, and maybe during this time period, this was normal and common, nothing new. Yet to use the words, “took pity on her madness” seems particularly cryptic. This is a woman filled with grief, hoping to find her friend or her Godson. She wanted to warn her friend of her son’s doom but this man shouted at her not to waste her time, as if visiting a friend who’s son was killed, or to be killed was a waste of time. Why would the man assume she was mad? It causes me to question the society they lived in because I can’t come to wrap my head around the idea that no one really cares about Nasser's life, his family, etc, but would go to a new lengths, to call someone who did care, mad? In modern day culture if someone passes away, the human thing to do is to console the family and respect the dead, within this culture, they ignore the dead and move on. The story line then cuts off. The page does not share whether Lusia continues on or gives up, this adds to the foreshadowing along with creating what I believe will be dramatic irony. I have a feeling that Luisa could have infact made a difference if she had continued on, but the fact that Nasser does die, makes me think she does not.
Cameron Kays
When I read chapter 3 I learned more about the Vicario twins that how they value honor. Especially with this quote “... While his brother agonized, drop by drop, trying to urinate under the tamarind trees” later says when talking about wrapping gauze “but this was something so different and so puzzling for Pablo Vicario that he interpreted it as some new trick on this brothers… So he put the knife in his hand and dragged him off almost but force in search of their sisters lost honor” (pg. 61). This quote demonstrates the extent in which at least, Pablo, is willing to defend his sister's honor. Marques describes this pain vividly and makes it sound very painful which it is. This represents how Pablo doesn't care about what Pedro is going through and is still willing to defend his sister's honor. He would drag Pedro even though is already in pain which shows his determination. This quote slight disconnect between the brothers which is quite interesting because before the narrator was just saying how they notice differences between the twins.
ReplyDeleteI haven't taken a close look at this quote prior to you blogging about it. I looked it up in the book and found the context of the quote and the whole passage is about how Pablo was very committed and Pedro questioned their actions. This brings up the question of how important was honor. If one of the brothers wasn't automatically ready to kill for honor was it truly that widely accepted. If their family was really so disrespected then wouldn't Pedro be on board from the second he found out. It kinda puts a whole in the whole idea that the whole honor killing was super acceptable beyond quotations. Perhaps this shows it was only mildly accepted. It’s also interesting how Pablo kinda forces Pedro to commit the crime. Maybe it is because Pablo feels Pedro is lost and needs guidance or is he just forcing him to do something he doesn't want to do.
DeleteChapters Two and Three of Gabriel Garcia Marquez’s “Chronicle of a Death Foretold” are the real “meat” of the story as the audience watches as the events of the morning of Nasar’s death unfold. Marquez uses a myriad of powerful literary devices to build up the suspense and show how little the witnesses of his death really had known. The most striking device was Marquez’s use of disjointed and disconnected recounts of the events of the morning. As the narrator mentions the recollections of the townspeople, the reader sees how their stories differ in every facet, from Santiago Nasar’s clothes to the weather for that morning. Another interesting part of these two chapters were the Vicario brothers preparations to kill the man they believe stole their sister’s “honor”. As they parade through the town preparing themselves mentally and physically they mention to several people that they were going to kill Santiago, but not a single person out if this group decided to go and give Nasar a warning or even get the authorities. Finally, the audience also learns if some social insight into rural Columbia in this time period. Unlike other nations, women were much less independent and were still bargained away like livestock rather than being treated with the respect a human deserves. This is apparent through the plot point where she is returned home on the night of her wedding because her groom thought she had lost her chastity and felt he couldn't marry her because of this fact, even though it was known by the women in this time that were ways to lose the marker of your chastity without being with another person.
ReplyDeleteIn chapter 3, the focus changes once again to the view of the twin brothers. The more I read of the chapter, the more sorrow i felt for the twins. It seemed as though the two were boldly announcing they were going to kill Santiago hoping for someone to stop them. It was a plea of help that went unanswered and eventually led to a death. In some way, the twins could have felt that the rest of the family, especially Angela, expected them to do something about the situation and to get revenge. If they didn’t do anything, they would seem dishonorable. This was very interesting to me because I can compare their time period to ours, where turning the other cheek would be the admirable thing to do today. They simply needed someone to stop them, however the Colonel does try this in the chapter. He “took away their knives and sent them to sleep” (53). After this, the twins went again to buy more knives and proceeded with their plan. There was an evident attempt at stopping them, however the twins did not listen. This leads the the question, what would it have taken to actually stop them? What kind of obligation were they looking for? In the end, they seemed to have no other choice but to follow through with the act and stay true to their duty. This shows just how much influence a culture and family honor can have on a small town.
ReplyDeleteI too felt sorry for the twins while reading this chapter aswell. As Clotilde Armenta said, "They looked like two children,"(55). I too had begun to feel as if the boys were either trying to get attention, yet I couldn't decide if it was to get someone to stop them, or to get someone to encourage them. It was quite an odd passage.
DeleteTo me, It felt as though the boys, if fact, had not wanted to kill Nasser, but fate had brought them to do it anyway.
In Chapter 4 of “Chronicle of a Death Foretold”, we see Angela Vicario many years after the death of Santiago Nasar, and the two sides of her character. The first example is when the narrator running into Angela Vicario. The narrator says, “At the window of a house that faced the sea, embroidering by machine during the hottest hour of the day, was a woman half in mourning, with steel-rimmed glasses and yellowish gray hair, and hanging above her head was a cage with a canary that didn’t stop singing” (102). The color yellow is mentioned or implied twice in this quote, showing it as a symbol. Yellow can often symbolize happiness, and optimism, but it can also symbolize cowardice and deceit. Both meanings of the color are evident in Angela Vicario. She deceived the whole town, and wrongfully put Santiago Nasar to his death, but she has also found peace with herself, and has settled down with Bayardo San Román. This quote really shows two sides of Angela, and that even despite the many years of time that have passed, both optimism for the future, and the deceit of the past live on inside her.
ReplyDeleteAnother example of this duality is when Angela realizes she is falling for Bayardo. Garcia-Marquez writes, “Mistress of her fate for the first time, Angela Vicario then discovered that hate and love are reciprocal passions. The more letters she sent the more the coals of her fever burned, but the happy rancor she felt for her mother also heated up” (108). Here, vivid imagery and fiery diction is used to really drive home the point of Angela having two sides, each with equal vigor. In chapter 4, we see Angela’s character many years after Santiago Nasar’s murder, with both happiness for her present and future, while still carrying her cowardice of the past in the symbolism of the color yellow.
In Chapter 5 of “Chronicle of a Death Foretold”, the reader is lead to believe that Santiago Nasar was completely innocent of taking Angela Vicario’s virginity, and was killed wrongfully. This is first shown when, “at the conclusion of his excessive diligence was not having found a single clue, not even the most improbable, that Santiago Nasar had been the cause of the wrong” (116, 117). This quote seems hyperbolic, but it is indeed factual. There was no proof, so Nasar must have been innocent. This book being a ‘chronicle’ really comes out in chapter 5 as well. The book tells of everyone’s accounts of the story, yet they all end with the same outcome. The final chapter focuses on those closest to Santiago. Nasir Miguel, a close friend, says, “‘From the first moment I understood that he didn’t have the slightest idea of what I was saying’…Then he asked him outright if he knew that the Vicario brothers were looking for him to kill him…He agreed that his manner reflected not so much fear as confusion” (135). This mixing of perspectives in the quote from both the narrator and Nahir Miguel adds to the idea that Nasar was not at fault. So many people claim he genuinely had no idea he was going to be killed, and was thoroughly confused at their claims. Overall, hyperboles, and the use of multiple perspectives adds to the audience believing Santiago was innocent of taking Angela’s honor.
ReplyDeleteI really like how you found that quote that supports the whole argument that he is innocent, but didn't seem like the police force was very extensive. I doubt they looked into the case very thoroughly, and just because no clue was found doesn't prove he is not guilty. On the other hand I also found it interesting how you talk about the various perspectives of the charters and how they helps to develop the story. Also even if he didn't know he was going to die I don't really think that can prove he was innocent. Nobody told him that it was going to happen, and it's not like if was was doing that he would always be looking over his shoulder thinking the brothers might try to kill him.
DeleteBaylor, I agree with your analysis that Santiago is not 100% innocent, however do you believe he deserved the punishment he recieved? Even if he was not innocent and he took her virginity, did he deserve to be murdered?
DeleteThroughout chapter 4, there were many references to smell. The smells referenced to may correlate with the sense of guilt that the town feels after Santiago’s death after not doing anything to prevent it, "No matter how much I scrubbed with soap and rags, I couldn't get rid of the smell" (78). Although the smell of a person can stay past their death for some time, the townspeople claimed they could still smell Santiago weeks after he had passed, leading me to believe they were feeling guilty as they could not get him out of their heads. Many people in the town had an opportunity to take action against the twins and prevent the death, however as none of them did, the entire town felt responsible for his death. I believe they were justified to feel this way because by not saying anything, they helped the brothers with their mission. The reason Marquez added the smell that the people of the town “could not get rid of” is to give insight into human nature. People naturally feel guilt when their actions have a negative outcome for someone else, especially something as large as death. Marquez may be trying to convey that they needed to take the threat more seriously, because at the end of the day everyone needs to live their actions.
ReplyDeleteThis is a very interesting a unique idea. I haven't thought about how Marquez utilized the smells in Chronicle of a Death Foretold to convey the idea of guilt. However, I do agree with you as the use of smell, especially immediately after Santiago’s death. The most noticeable example is when the narrator goes to comfort a naked woman, but she refuses to sleep with him because he smells like Santiago. I think that here the idea of Nasar’s lingering smell is not only indicative of the guilt that many members of the town feels for failing to warn this fairly well respected man about the dangers that awaited him before his murder. However, I also think that it is symbolic of the idea of consequences, as although Santiago is dead and that part of the story is over. His odor still reminds those of what had happened and their failure to act on that day.
DeleteIn chapter 5, most of the characters make it seems as though they could not have prevented the death, although in the previous chapter is was made very obvious they were feeling guilt about the situation. I found it interesting that the narrator is writing this novel as factual, and trying his hardest to find out the facts of the investigation. However, he portrays them through magical realism. This leads to my question, why would a murder investigation novel based on factual evidence be told using magical realism? Wouldn't this simply make the story less believable? At this point in the novel, with all the bits and pieces coming together, I began to question whether the fact that Santiago’s death was foretold became the reason it happened. If the twins had said “We might kill Santiago Nasar” would the outcome have been different? Once things are said, are they set in stone? I also saw a recurring theme of fate. The judge was disturbed that he had to write a brief about the death that he did not fully comprehend, "Most of all, he never thought it legitimate that life should make use of so many coincidences forbidden literature, so that there should be the untrammeled fulfillment of a death so clearly foretold" (116)
ReplyDeleteChapter 3
ReplyDelete“They burst panting into the parish house, closely pursued by a group of roused-up Arabs, and they laid the knives, with clean blades, on Father Amador's desk. Both were exhausted from the barbarous work of death, and their clothes and arms were soaked and their faces smeared with sweat and still living blood, but the priest recalled the surrender as an act of great dignity. "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 honour"“ (29)
The actions of the Vicario brothers give the impression that they believe they are innocent to the audience. They lay weapons down as a symbol of retirement from their behavior, but not as a sign of guilt. The Father says “ perhaps before God” to send the message that perhaps due to the religious belief that women should be virgins before they are married it was ok. Although what he says does not send the impressions that he believes it was was the best choice of action. While the brothers end the impression to the audience with a guiltless tone that they believe that they are innocent before everyone because their culture supports the revenge/ honor killing of Santiago Nasar.
The Imagery of the brothers is also quite interesting. Thier description begins with the strong phrase, “exhausted from the barbarous work of death”. The phrase gives of a really deep sense of darkness and despair that really impacts the reader's impression of the brothers. They are then described as covered in blood, as well as some living blood. This also helps create a gruesome dark image of the brothers as it seems like they don't care they just took a man's life.
Finally it is quote interesting how the Father can find dignity in the act of surrendering because he clearly states later that they are only innocent in the eyes of God. So it seems as if he should be disgusted by them no matter what. perhaps he sees them through the eyes of God
“For the immense majority of people there was only one victim: Bayardo San Roman. 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. Santiago Nasar had expiated the insult, the brothers Vicario had proved their status as men, and the seduced sister was in possession of her honor once more. The only one who had lost everything was Bayardo San Roman: "poor Bayardo," as he was remembered over the years” (49).
ReplyDeleteAt first this statement can be confusing to the American reader due to cultural conflicts. The strong influence of the celtic church affects the morals of the society. It is very bad for the bride to be deflowered before her wedding. In their eyes this justifies their actions. While Americans have moved passed a combination of church and state or something similar. Americans have adopted the ideology that those wrong doers will be arrested and prosecuted under the law by the government.
After taking a step back the reader can see how in the eyes of their culture Bayardo San Roman is the victim. He chose a wife believing she was a virgin but found out she waste which was highly frowned upon in their culture. The only way for the brothers to regain their honor was to kill Santiago Nasar. Now in the eyes of the reader this may seem radical, but based off of the majority of the people believing Bayardo San Roman was the victim it can be determined that their culture believes otherwise.
It is also quite disturbing to the reader how the people refer to Bayardo San Roman as “poor Bayardo” the only man who lost everything. The people come of with a sympathetic tone which seems quite strange since since Santiago Nasar lost his life. Most would agree that a life is worth more than a man's marriage. Perhaps the beliefs of their culture differs when concerning the value of a life.
Chapter 5
ReplyDeleteTwelve days after the crime, the investigating magistrate came upon a town that was an open wound. In the squalid wooden office in the town hall, drinking pot coffee laced with cane liquor against the mirages of the heat, he had to ask for troop reinforcements to control the crowd that was pouring in to testify without having been summoned, everyone eager to show off his own important role in the drama.
To start the twelves days could have some significance. During the Medieval times the twelfth day of christmas symbolized the end of winter. Similarity the whole fiasco around the death is starting to die down. In both cases a dark sad time is being put in the past. Yet there are still some days of cold left.
On the contrary the metaphor about the town being an open wound. This gives the reader the impression that the problem is alive and well. An open wound can still get infected and become worse. An open wound also gives the impression that it is a large wound that will take a long time to heal. This can be seen in the description of people later in their lives who are still damaged. On the other hand it could be a smaller wound that people will forget in a couple months. People worry about the current cut they have on their body but the scar can always be seen from previous damage. The scars effect Bayardo San Roman and Angela the most by far.
It is also quite interesting how everyone wants to be important in the case. It is similar to the doll’s house in which everyone is very conscious of their self image and importance. The reader gets the impression that the people care more about being involved than actually care about the people who were damaged by the event. It also seems like the magistrate is trying to show off his power by asking for troop reinforcements
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn chapter 3 of Marquez unique novel. The audience witnesses the buildup and subsequent death of Santiago Nasar. Fresh off the information that Nasar was the man who “stole” Angela Vicario’s honor, the Vicario brothers decided to restore this lost honor by killing the man who took it. The brothers parade around the town, making preparations to kill Nasar. Although they clearly express their intent to kill him to several people in the town, no one truly takes preventative measures to stop this crime from playing over. Could it be because people secretly thought that Santiago deserved it? Or they didn't want to be the ones to make a big deal out of this situation if what the Vicario brothers promised were nothing more than idle threats. Their encounters include their time at the butcher’s shop sharpening their and the short conversation with the policeman. At the shop, the Vicario brothers tell the butcher that they plan to kill Santiago Nasar in order to restore their family’s honor. The butcher decides that they are still drunk from the wedding the previous night and dismisses these thoughts as the ramblings of crazy, drunk men. For this reason, he makes no effort to stop them. After, while the brothers walk around town, they bump into a policemen who upon hearing of what they plan to do, takes their knives away. The policeman is aware that they couldn't simply go get more knives, but he believes they don't truly intend to go through with this plan and simply confiscates their knives instead. Neither of the men who heard about the plans of Pablo and Pedro Vicario even bothered to warn Santiago that their were some in the village who intended to kill him.
ReplyDeleteThis relates back to TOK, to what extent do we take a threat seriously. In CODF apparently nobody took this threat seriously. I like how you explore the various option to the way people think, which may be the cause of this murder occurring. The thought you had about people secretly not telling Santiago I found interesting. My question to you is, do you think we can spot these people, and if you do find them should there be any punishment for their belief? This because they knew Santiago was going to die but their beliefs sent them back in not telling so is this considered unethical based on human rights?
DeleteMarch 4th, 2016
ReplyDelete““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.” (49)
I found this chapter of Chronicles of a Death Foretold, by Gabriel Marquez quite interesting. Knowing their justifications for murder seem odd to me. In elementary school, I attended a catholic school for about two years. Being there I learned a lot, about the catholic religion. One thing I know Catholics do is repent. You walk up to a pastor in a weird box and tell him of all your sins. He will then forgive you and give you a specific number of “hail mary's” you must do to wipe yourself clean. When Father Amador, says, “perhaps before God, he is implying confession, the cleansing of your sins. You may have confessed in secret but you still committed murder. Pedro not only openly admits fault, but goes on to say that they are innocent even though they took a life because it was for honor. Amador’s quote proves that during the time period, many Catholics felt they could do whatever they thought was necessary as long as repented. They believed God had forgiven them for murder and that their peers and justice system should to. The make the claim that this was out of honor. The twins also sound as if they expect the priest to agree with them, that as long as it’s out of honor that murder was committed, all is well. So when thinking about weather honor justifies a solution, you must put the story into context of its time and moral values. The Vicario brothers obviously felt that they were doing the right thing and should be forgiven all out of honor emphasizing how important honor was at this point. Rather than the present day American Dream, of money, love, and happiness, their emphasis and stress was on honor, even though some, their sister, didn’t see honor as a code to live by.
Cameron Kays
Sorry I blogged so late. It was because my wifi cut out and I couldn't post them until this morning.
DeleteMarch 7, 2016
ReplyDelete“The body had been exposed to the public view in the center of the living room, lying on a narrow iron cot while they were building a rich man’s coffin for it. They brought fans from the bedrooms and some neighboring house, but there were so many people anxious to see it that they had to push back the furniture and take down the bird cages and pots of ferns, and even the the heat was unbearable.” 73
This passage lead me to be curious about the culture of the dead within their society. Is this, cramming in many people to see a dead corps on the table, common for their society, or did many people go out of their way to see the dead body after all the rumors. The fact that the family approved of this, Santiago’s mom, leads me to believe this is infact common for the time period. I don't believe that his mom would have been willing to show her dead son to all of those who knew he was to be killed and just waited, if it wasn't common for the time period. However this detail was sickening to me. Within the tone of the words, it’s uncomfortable and it makes perfect sense why it would be incredibly hot as well. For many staring at Santiago, it was an uncomfortable situation. The tone came off as uncomfortable for me due to the fact I felt once again Santiago was being taken advantage of. He didn’t deserve to be viewed the way he was, remembered bloody, cold, and dead in a room that was way too hot. The next section even goes on to say that dogs began to show up because of the smell, the heat, and the decomposition of the body. Allowing the town to see this process, for me, seemed disrespectful. In my opinion, this moment took away his honor. However, this moment did go full circle and it was ironic that the town was first to know that he was to be killed, and the town was able to see him dead. This moment emphasized the town’s importance as a whole, the town, within this story held all the power. There was all this potential energy that no one seized out of fear, revenge, or lack of care. It was quite ironic that the town was not only holding his life, but also manipulating his death by taking control of the house.
Cameron Kays
I think you brought up some great points on how odd the public display of Santiago Nasar’s death affected the town and the reader’s perception of the now deceased protagonist. I would like to add that the permeating smell of the course also adds to the overall underlying sense of guilt that the townspeople feel, as they struggle to forget about him when his odor seems to encompass the town. For instance we see how Maria refuses to sleep with the narrator simply because he smells of Nasar. Another example of this is when the Vicario brothers are able to recognize the malodorous smell of Santiago decomposing body and quickly become sick after the fact.
DeleteIn Chapter 4 of this interesting story, the reader finds some insights into how the town reacted to a murder. They are shown who is victimized and who is villi snoozed and how gender plays a big role in it. In the aftermath of the murder. Pablo and Pedro and arrested and thrown in jail. Meanwhile Santiago’s corpse undergoes an seemingly needless autopsy when being hastily buried to hide the sub par work of the coroner. The rest of the Vicario family attempts to save face, and also decides to move to Manuera. The audience sees the deceptive actions of the pass continue as Angela wears face coverings to hide the bruises caused by her mother’s beatings and dresses in red, an effort to hide that fact that she is mourning for her recently deceased lover. However the real victim in the eyes of the townspeople is Bayardo San Roman who is pitied for “losing” his wonderful bride. We see how although Angela did the honorable thing by not lying and was beaten, she doesn't received the same sympathy that San Roman does. The reader also sees a glimpse into the future as the narrator reveals what happens to the Vicario brothers after their crime, and what happens to Angela after the fact. In addition, the narrator talks about the Arab community in this town and how they are peaceful people who wouldn't seek revenge for killing “one of theirs”. This chapter provides incredible insight into what happens to the characters and how it has affected their lives.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your interpretation. Both Chapters 4 and 5 do a really nice job of wrapping up how the character's react to the death, and how they go about living their lives after a huge event. I really like your point about gender roles as well. I definitely agree that men and women were treated differently, especially in grief. The consequences they both faced were a product of the time period: Angela is treated as an outcast for not upholding her virginity, while Bayardo is pitied because his wife didn't hold up hers. It is implied that Bayardo has had previous lovers as well, yet he is not shunned for having premarital sex.
Delete“Under that paraphrase of discouragement, in a merry sketch with the same blood ink, he drew a heart pierced by an arrow. For him, just as for Santiago Nasar's closest friends, the victim's very behavior during his last night was overwhelming proof of his innocence.”
ReplyDeleteI chose this quote because I thought that it was quite interesting that the investigator sympathized with Nasar when no one else did. Not only did the investigator, he knew the truth, that Nasar had been wrongfully accused, but no one could do anything about it. Similar to how no one could have prevented Nasar's death. It emphasis the idea of wrong doing on the front of the report, but inside presents the idea that of fate, that no matter what happened, Nasar would end up dead and would be labeled as taking Angela's virginity.
I found the detail about the heart with an arrow quite intriguing. Thinking about the heart, it portrays a sad tone. A tone of grief and regret. The small heart, for me, leaves me with an image in my mind. The way the heart was drawn is open to your own perspective, but the fact that the detail about the heart being drawn in memory leaves me with a feeling of frustration and remorse for Nasar and his family, who the heart was drawn for. This little symbol speaks a lot to a pull away message because this little heart will be Nw commonly remembered for me, and every time I see a heart with an arrow, I will think of Santiago and the wrong committed against him. Santiago’s death may not have been avoidable, and Santiago may not have been admired by many, but this little heart drawn shows that someone cared, and will care. It’s proof that Santiago Nasar will be remembered.
Cameron Kays
I definitely agree with your ideas on Marquez’s use of this quote, it is quite an interesting idea. I would also like to mention that the violent diction, indicted by the use of words like “blood” and “arrow” set a dark and morbid tone and give the reader a feeling for the grave and serious nature of the events of the story. In addition, it becomes apparent how the use of the word “arrow” is appropriate as Santiago is killed by another person, just as one would be by an arrow through the heart. For instance we see how Maria refuses to sleep with the narrator simply because he smells of Nasar. Another example of this is when the Vicario brothers are able to recognize the malodorous smell of Santiago decomposing body and quickly become sick after the fact.
DeleteIn Chapter 5 of Chronicle of a Death Foretold, the haziness and lack of clarity is seemingly expunged as the narrator provides the reader with information that no longer competes with one another or lacks validity. In this chapter the information of Santiago Nasar’s death comes from those that remember it vividly and as though it happened recently, while also talking more about how the town handled the situation. For years after Santiago's death, nobody could stop talking about it. Many people just couldn't deal with the guilt. Some people died from the guilt or went insane, like Don Rogelio de la Flor. When an investigative magistrate is sent to the town, he's overwhelmed with the number of people who want to testify about their part in the murder.There is a trial and it only lasts three days, but the biggest mystery is how Santiago got involved in this whole ordeal. No one believes that he and Angela had a relationship, and that his behavior would have been a little too inconspicuous for a man who knew he was about to be murdered. Everyone in town knows that the Vicario brothers are plotting to kill Santiago, but instead of doing anything to stop them, they stand in the square watching like it is some sort or spectacle to behold. It seems strange that such a well respected and loved man would receive no warning or notification from this community about his impending murder, and that even during the act, no one tried to help him, as he simply stumbles into his kitchen and dies.
ReplyDeleteIn chapter 4, I found it interesting how Angela began to write letters to Bayardo. I also can't believe that she did this for about seventeen years. Bayardo then comes in august to her workplace the a suitcase of upon letters from her and another with his clothes. This is interesting because it gets away from the plot if the story which is revolved around Santiago Nasar's death. The reason why I find the interesting is because the letters that Angela send could be anything, and, in fact, it could reveal whether she truly did have premarital sex with Santiago.It makes me question why Marquez felt it necessary to include this when it didn’t have to do anything with Santiago's Nasar murder. Also the notion that these are love letters tells us more about the relationship between Angela and Bayardo. It seems like instead of Bayardo going got agree the roles had switched and now Angela is going for Bayardo. It is also interesting that Bayardo did not open. I think the deepens their love in their relationship because just the simple arrival of love letters and not the content of the love letters attracted Bayardo. With this thought, I believe the reason why Bayardo waited so long was because he wanted to see Angela true love.
ReplyDeleteChapter 5 revealed the communities wronging in not taking action to the situation but instead just simply watching and see what happens next. Due to this Santiago was confused towards the end so when his father told him that the Vicario brothers wanted to kill he didn't understand because it was the first time hearing the news. what I thought at least with the given information from Marquez. It is also interesting in which Marquez builds up to the conclusion. It's anticlimactic because just before the end he talks about how Santiago is innocence leading us to believe that the answer to this chronicle will finally be revealed to the reader, but in reality, it just reveals the how Santiago Nasar died in his kitchen. I believe what this tell us is that because there is no conclusion/answer to whether Angela actually lost her virginity to danger. It just a ritual. Like with the town, when a bad thing happens people think the other person will do something about it. Marquez is telling us that this struggle happens every day and there isn't an answer because people want the answer to come to them when in reality you have to go and find the answer either by action, exploring or any way, but not just being a spectator and wait for something the expected to happen which is receiving the answer.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with your interpretation of this quote. The idea of women being helpless also ties into the theme of Spanish machismo present throughout the novella. Men are seen to be as the protectors of the weak and helpless, to almost an absurd degree. The Vicario brothers were willing to murder a man to defend their sister, someone who they believed to be helpless, as shown in the quote you mentioned.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the brothers felt they needed to do this for their family honor, do you think this justified their actions? The women never fully expressed a want for this to occur, everything was very assumed. This may indicate that the brothers wanted to do it for themselves to some extent as they did not ask what Angela wanted to happen
ReplyDelete