I don't know for a fact that it took me 100 days to finish 100 Years of Solitude, but it was close. Sometimes you read a book and it just does NOT suck you in. Usually that's when you decide not to finish the book and just say, "Well, at least I tried". I'm glad I didn't give up on this one. And I'm now going to have to re-read this book.
The rest of this (hopefully not too long) post will be about why, exactly, I'm going to have to re-read this book. As I read through the book I kept getting bogged down by trying to remember who they were talking about at any given time. 90% of the characters have some derivation of 1 of two names, either Ursula or Aurelino, the matriarch and patriarch of the family. Additionally they timeline gets switched around quite a few times. Also, there are long stretches where the only thing happening is character development (that very important task of bringing your flat characters into the third dimension so to speak), without any Hollywood-esque action sequences. No single one of these things would have put me off the book, however the frequent overlapping of each of these characteristics was enough to make the book a chore at several intervals.
So why re-read a book like this? That is a question easily answered by a reading of the last page of the book. In my humble opinion, the genius of this book is that it takes the story of many generations of a family, essentially from its genesis to its quite literal extinction, and uses the lives of these characters to reveal the story of an entire village and its people. The way in which he combines figurative with literal is nothing short of magnificent. I'm left wondering if there actually was a cloud of yellow butterflies that constantly followed one character around, even marking his death, or if that single drop of blood really did navigate an entire city all the way to the room in which the victim's mother was sitting just to announce his death?
Any one of the reasons I liked this book could possibly (I said possibly) be considered gimmicky. However, having all of them in one place and tied together by masterful narration, it's impossible for it to be a fluke, or beginner's luck. No, the reason I wish to read this book again is that now I understand how to view it. When I first started reading it I had no idea what to look for, no idea where certain things were going. And if this book has a fault (from my perspective) it's that it is hard to read until you know what to expect. Sort of like that uncle that is hard to appreciate until you really get to know him - at which time you realize just how well intentioned he really was and can finally appreciate his actions and words.
Also, I completely understand why there is a family tree at the front of the book. More useful even than the maps in the Lord of the Rings books.
Mike
Monday, January 09, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Being such a fan of LWW i'm sure you didn't have a problem getting used to the mix of realism and fantasy. Marquez's grandmather actualyl sued that style to tell him stories when he was young. funny to think that 500 years ago, that style would be the norm for passing on info, and our black and white logic would be odd.
About the names, it's obviously a purposful device. Is the story about one man? One family? The village? The country? Mankind in general???? At some point (for me anyway) to enjoy what was happening, I had to give up and read each character anew each time I encountered them, discovering more and recalling what I had learned earlier if possible. One would think this would be a pointless was to read, but actaully, it drew me deeper into the story some how. you'll see what I mean.
The, "recalling what I had learned earlier if possible" part was certainly one area where I struggled as I tried to recall - now who were this guys parents or, wait...who just died?
Post a Comment