More thoughts on Hamlet

I have decided to let Hamlet rest for a little while and move on to another play, but before doing so, I wanted to write a post summarizing my current interpretation of the play, along with my questions, doubts and conflicting hypothesis.

One of the greatest characteristics about Hamlet and at the same time, the cause for its difficulty and depth, is its uncertainty and ambiguity. Almost all characters and events can be interpreted and understood in different ways. It is a great thing because it offers a wide range of creative possibilities. That’s the reason the performances and adaptations of this play are always so different from each other. I don’t think I’ll ever get tired of seeing new versions of this play: the words might be familiar but I still feel I’m experiencing something new, and I love that.

The problem comes when one tries to analyze the play. I have already accepted that I will never have a final answer to all my questions and that is a good thing but at the same time, kind of annoying. 

In a previous post I wrote a little about Hamlet’s delay in executing his revenge. I thought Hamlet was a very contradictory character because he is constantly delaying and making excuses for executing his plan but at the same time acts impulsively and has no problem in killing other people.

David, a fellow blogger, commented that maybe there is really no delay and that this was not a problem when the play was first performed because people knew it had to have five acts and therefore Hamlet could not kill Claudius early because then there would be no play. And that is true and I’ve read a lot of people agree with this idea. On the other hand, and what may be a problem for this theory, is that Hamlet actually refers to this delay and is tortured by it. At one point, the Ghost actually has to remind Hamlet of the task he has given him:

Ham.     Do you not come your tardy son to chide,

               That, lapsed in time and passion, lets go by

               The important acting of your dread command?

               O, say!

Ghost.   Do not forget. This visitation

              Is but to whet thy almost blunted purpose.

(Act III, Scene IV)

I have realized I tend to believe that there is indeed a delay and a reason behind it. Why? Well, I think it is mainly because of Hamlet’s behavior throughout the play. I feel there is something strange about his demeanor, not only because he is hurting for the obvious reasons, but also because he doesn’t seem to be capable of fulfilling the Ghost’s request until extreme circumstances force him to do so. It is only at the end, when his mother is dead, that he kills Claudius and even then it is a sudden and impulsive action, not a planned one. 

I also asked myself if Hamlet is really crazy (and if that is partly the reason for the delaying of his revenge) or if he just pretends to be, in order to get what he wants, manipulate others or even distance himself from the ones that are trying to help him. I tend to believe the latter. Declaring him crazy is to oversimplify such a complex character. So, in my humble and inexperienced opinion, Hamlet is not crazy because that would be too easy and there wouldn’t be so much debate regarding the true nature of his character. I have read some people think he acts the way he does because he is just too sensitive for the corrupt, manipulative and deceiving world he lives in. Maybe he is delaying his actions because he has to come to terms with them. I don’t think I completely agree with this theory. Hamlet does show from the start certain disdain for the court and a sort of inadequacy in it, but he also shows his ability to be as deceiving and manipulative (and cruel) as the others. He kills Polonius without really knowing who he was attacking and he sends Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to their deaths without problem. And he is misogynistic. Yes, I know that word may be a little strong and we don’t know if he was always like that, but from what we can see in the play, he is definitely prejudiced and violent towards women. He is especially cruel to Ophelia, who is basically the victim of everyone in the play. Therefore, I don’t think he is too “pure” for what is required of him.

Then, why is it he has so much trouble? So far, what I feel most inclined to believe, is that he is having trouble with accepting the reality of his situation. He doesn’t lack the tenacity or courage, if you will, to avenge his father. I think he just can’t face the reality of what is going on. And to be completely honest, I don’t know what bothers him most: the fact that his father was murdered by his uncle or that his mother married him and loves him. I don’t know who he feels most betrayed by and maybe that is also his problem. 

Anyway, I know this subject has been discussed over and over again and I’m not providing something new, I’m just writing my impressions and doubts, but I feel that organizing such thoughts and sharing them is an important part of my experience with this particular play. 

This is not the end of Hamlet for me, I just need to leave it for a while so I can move on with my project and also to be able to come back to it with fresher eyes and maybe a new perspective, just like when I finish translating something and leave it alone for some time before proofreading it; that way it is easier to see things better and clearer.

As always, please feel free to comment, give me your opinion or debate with me. It is all part of the process I very much enjoy.

The House of Mirth - Edith Wharton

I fell in love with this book from the first couple of sentences. That's all it took for me to know I was really going to enjoy it: "Selden paused in surprise. In the afternoon rush of the Grand Central Station, his eyes had been refreshed by the sight of Miss Lily Bart."

It was a great opening for a great story. I like its detailed study of everyday life and the deep reflection of a particular society, especially one as deceiving and tricky as the upper classes of the turn of the century. I guess I have to read more works belonging to the American literary naturalism movement. Edith Wharton is an amazing representative; she was so meticulous and thorough it made me feel very much involved with the story and its main character. 

Lily Bart is a beautiful woman of the upper-class turn-of-the-century society of New York. She doesn’t have money of her own but has an important social standing because of her family’s former wealth. She is obsessed with money and luxury and the only way for her to survive in this society is to marry “well.” She cannot conceive a life outside of what she is used to, even though this means sacrificing her true feelings. In order to achieve her goal she uses her two most powerful tools: her astonishing beauty and the impact it has on the people around her, and her ability to keep appearances and always do and say the right thing at the right time. She is great at reading people’s expressions, reactions, even their eyes. That is the only way to obtain the truth of people so obsessed with been “civil” and doing what is “convenient” and it allows her to manipulate others.

This is a ruthless society. It is obsessed with money even though the rule is to pretend it doesn’t matter. It is an artificial society because nothing on the surface is true: they lie, cheat, manipulate, back-stab and step on everybody behind a cover of polite manners and the false pretense of enjoying each other’s company. Navigating this sea of manners, customs, traditions and prejudices is an art and the women successful in it could have easily been successful diplomats: knowing to whom to be loyal depending on what is convenient, helping pave the way into society of a newcomer who could be of use once in it, turning your back on the “wrong people” in order to save yourself from scandal, etc.  I wonder if there was any truth in anything they said to each other in their efforts to be successful. 

Hypocrisy is at the order of the day in many ways. They disapprove of women who openly want to marry for money but they will turn their backs on the ones who don’t marry into money. Men are allowed to behave “suspiciously” but women aren't,  they won’t even receive the benefit of the doubt, the worst is always assumed and gossiped about. The saddest part of this is that a woman’s worst enemy is another woman. They will destroy each other if they have to, they will even do it out of spite.

Everyone plays a role, everyone acts. Keeping appearances was the goal, a way of life, an ideal, even though it involved so much misery most of the times. 

Lily is the victim of this society but she almost sabotages herself as well. She eventually comes to realize that money will never bring her true happiness, but she also knows she will never be happy without it either. She is destined to always be dissatisfied. One could easily condemn Lily for wanting to marry for money, for wanting a “nice” life. But that wouldn't be entirely fair. At the time, women could not support themselves at that level unless they were heiresses. The only way to obtain a safe, secure, “nice” life was by marrying well. It was a matter of survival. One could also say: “What’s the need to be rich and fabulous? She was a fool”. And yes, she was a fool several times but consider her context, her upbringing, what she thought she was made for:

“Since she had been brought up to be ornamental, she could hardly blame herself for failing to serve any practical purpose”.

The consequences of Lily's actions and decisions caused her a great deal of pain and I found myself being angry at her for her foolishness but at the same time angry at a society that created an unsustainable situation for women like Lily. A society that created an impossible standard of righteousness that they didn't follow themselves but tried so hard to enforce. 

What should have surprised me but unfortunately didn’t is that even though times have changed and women don’t have the same limited position, the upper class societies are basically still the same prejudiced, false and elitist group of people. Lima is so far away from the elite New York society of the late 1890’s but one can indeed perceive the same obsession with money and appearances. I guess some things never change, it doesn’t matter how much “evolved” we are or in what part of the world we live. Money is power, always, everywhere. Looking the right way, going to the right places and relating to the right people is as important as it was then. 

I really enjoyed this book and admire Edith Wharton more than ever for being so insightful. I read The Age of Innocence last year and thought it was a wonderful book but I like The House of Mirth even better. It is a complete story and every part of it has its purpose. The construction and development of the characters is so well round-up. I wanted to hate Lily Bart sometimes but she was so complex, so human, I couldn’t help liking her and admiring her even; I was really rooting for her.

The Secret Garden - Frances Hodgson Burnett

I wish I had read this when I was a kid. What a beautiful book! I’m pretty sure I would have become obsessed with having my own garden, my own “bit of earth”. Maybe it would have been a little frustrating because I lived in an apartment (still do), in the middle of this gray, chaotic city, but I can see myself running to the park and watching things grow and feeling the magic.

Actually, I want my own bit of earth now. I think this book has made me realize how much I forget to enjoy life  sometimes. I spend so much time indoors, working and being tired that maybe I’m a little bit like Colin who just needed some fresh air and to discover the magic of things. Strangely enough, I do understand what Colin is talking about: that magic in life that makes us stronger and happier and that moves us in such a way (when we let it) that we also want to shout that we are going to live forever and ever and ever.

Mary Lennox is a little girl who lost her parents and is sent to live with his uncle in a big house in the middle of the moors. She is described as unlikable, rude and very self-involved. She does not like anyone and is not interested in anything. One day she discovers a secret garden that has been closed for ten years and it has such an impact on her, she starts changing that very same day. She later discovers she has a cousin, Colin, living secluded in the house, who thinks he is terminally ill and lives completely obsessed with his death. 

The transformation of Mary and Colin is the central plot of the book. They change drastically but it is not forced; it was completely natural, just like a couple of flowers in the springtime. And they are just that: give them enough sun, air, space to grow and a little rain and you have two gorgeous flowers blooming happily. 

The awakening of the garden leads to the awakening of Colin and Mary. They are both very similar: they both have been utterly neglected by their parents, have never really been loved by anyone and they have never loved anyone either. When Mary discovered the garden, she discovers a part of herself she didn't know she had: the ability to be happy and seek happiness. She opened both a physical and emotional door to a different place that seemed to be dead but was just “sleeping” and starting blooming as soon as Mary let it breathe. It is basically the same for Colin but with greater physical improvement. It shows the power the mind has over our health. Colin was not really sick, not physically; his mind was. 

I like the idea that nature heals us, in every way possible, and that healing the mind from all those bad, dark thoughts and feelings ends up healing our bodies as well. 

I could say I’m an expert in worrying too much, in focusing on the bad things. I am a pessimist sometimes, I have to admit that, but I have also experienced the difference when trying to think positively. I have been trying to make that effort and I have seen the results: it does seem that focusing on the misery only brings more misery but focusing on the positive side of things brings peace of mind and a sort of soothing feeling I wish I could experience more often. I know is up to me, but it can be very hard sometimes. I have to discover the magic.

I really enjoyed reading this book. It had a positive effect on me: I read it before going to sleep and I would finally fall asleep dreaming about the garden instead of thinking obsessively about work. It is an incredible thing the impact books have on our daily lives, isn't it?

I still wish I had a garden to go into right now. I feel that maybe I need to be healed too. 

Weekend

Estoy súper emocionada por este fin de semana: ¡No tengo que trabajar! Quizás todavía no debería estar celebrando, sólo es jueves y quién sabe si de repente llega una traducción urgente para el lunes, pero tengo un buen presentimiento. He estado trabajando sin parar los últimos dos meses (incluso los fines de semana) y me siento rara por poder pasar mi tiempo haciendo lo que me de la gana (lo que significa leer, pasar el tiempo con mi enamorado y ver Arrested Development). 

Ayer terminé de leer el primer volumen de Las Obras de Edgar Allan Poe. Tiene ocho cuentos, de los cuales dos disfruté bastante: Asesinatos en la Rue Morgue y el Misterio de Marie Roget. Son historias detectivescas y siempre disfruto de un rompecabezas bien armado. El resto de las historias, bueno... El Insecto de Oro fue divertido y corto pero no puedo decir que el resto me gustara mucho. Admito que me perdí algunas veces y me alegré al terminar de leerlos (al menos terminé, eso es bueno).

Este fin de semana me voy a dedicar a leer Historia del Rey Transparente de Rosa Montero. Hasta ahorita sí me gusta, pero todavía no me engancha. Normalmente Montero me encanta, por lo que tengo expectativas altas para este libro. Veremos qué pasa. También estoy emocionada porque hasta ahora estuve descuidando un poco la literatura en español y ya era hora de leer algo en mi propio idioma. Esto en verdad es una meta y planeo leer más literatura española o latinoamericana en los próximos meses. Creo que me puse tan contenta cuando recibí mi Kindle y comencé a leer todos estos libros a los que antes no tenía acceso (en su idioma original) que me olvidé que mi primer y más grande amor es la literatura en mi propio idioma.

Es un muy buen momento para leer, el clima está lindo, soleado pero no caliente y las noches son frescas y mucho mejores para mis planes de lectura. Ya lo he mencionado varias veces, no me concentro bien cuando hace mucho calor.

¡Espero que tengan un genial fin de semana!

I'm really excited for this weekend: I'm not working! Maybe I shouldn't celebrate just yet, it is only Thursday and who knows if an urgent translation comes along for Monday, but I have a good feeling. I have been working non-stop for the past two months (even the weekends) and I feel weird for actually being able to spend my time doing whatever I want (which means reading, hanging out with the boyfriend and watching Arrested Development). 

Yesterday I finished reading the first volume of The Works of Edgar Allan Poe. It has eight short stories, two of which I really enjoyed: Murders in the Rue Morgue and The Mystery of Marie Roget. They are detective stories and I always enjoy a good  puzzle put together. The rest of the stories, well... The Gold Bug was fun and short but I cannot say I liked the rest very much. I admit I got lost at times and was glad when I finished reading them (at least I finished them, that's a good thing).

This weekend I will read Historia del Rey Transparente by Rosa Montero. So far I like it, but I'm not hooked yet. I usually love Montero so I have high expectations for this book. We'll see what happens. It is also exciting because I have been neglecting literature in Spanish and it was about time to read something in my own language. This is actually a goal and I plan to read more of Spanish or Latin American literature in the next few months. I think that I got so excited when I got my Kindle and started reading all these books to which I had no access before (in their original language) that I forgot that my first and greatest passion is the literature in my own language.

It is a very good time to read right now, the weather is beautiful, sunny but not hot and the nights are cool and much more suitable for my reading preferences. As I have already mentioned quite a few times before, I don't focus well when it is too hot.

I hope you have an amazing weekend!

The Sun Also Rises - Ernest Hemingway

As I said in a comment in another post, I have a love/hate relationship with this book and Hemingway. I appreciate Hemingway’s genius, his exquisite manner of storytelling and the amount of emotion he can convey in just one sentence. I love the “bohemianism” of the setting, of the characters. On the other hand, I hate Hemingway’s “macho” notions, how he romanticizes something as barbaric as bullfighting, how he idealizes not necessarily the braveness of men, but their aggressiveness. 

It is fair to say that bullfighting scenes almost ruined the book for me. I know it is fiction and I should take it as part of a bigger work of art, but having read quite a bit about Hemingway’s life, hobbies and interests and knowing that this book is based on real-life events, I couldn't help getting a little mad. I have heard every argument saying it is an ancient tradition, that it represents the identity of a country, etc. That is nonsense. It is a barbaric tradition that should not continue. I don’t like people who torture animals for entertainment (and then have the nerve to call it art). 

It sickened me to read the parts of the bullring. I tried to be as objective as possible, reminding myself that it was part of a story and had its purpose there. I have read many other unpleasant things before and they didn’t affect me this way. I have read about horrible wars, death, misery. Why this, then? Why was this affecting me so? And not in the way Hemingway intended: it was making me angry and sad. Then, I realized it was because Hemingway was romanticizing it, because the bullfighter was supposed to be some kind of hero and example of masculinity in the story. What affected me was not the bullfighting itself  (within the story) but the perspective from which it was written and by someone who thought it was beautiful. That sickened me. I guess I’ll never understand how making another living creature suffer became a sport, the object of fanaticism and admiration. How a genius man as Hemingway thought it was beautiful to see a bull bleed to death. 

I could rant about this for pages but I don’t want to do that. There are many other noteworthy things I’d like to mention.

What about the characters? I loved the apparent freedom of their relationship. Brett is the center of everyone’s attention. Jake, Robert and Mike are in love with Brett. She is in love with Jake, engaged to Mike and having an affair with Robert, and then with the bullfighter. I really liked the lack of a judgmental tone in the narration. Brett is definitely a woman without the limitation of society’s prejudices and stereotypes for women’s behavior. She seemed to float around trying to be happy, making a lot of mistakes in the way and regretting them to a certain point but not really learning from them. As a contradiction to her own nature, she likes the “macho” idea of a man. When Romero, the bullfighter, kills the bull and presents  to Brett the bull’s ears, I couldn’t help thinking of a medieval warrior presenting to his princess the head of his opponent. 

After a while you can see the conflicts that lie below the surface. They are not really free; there’s a sort of disorientation making them sad. At the end of the book their underlying sadness is revealed. Hemingway is good at that.

That is the reason I do get the whole “lost generation” thing in this book. I don’t know if it is all the wine-drinking, the fighting, the feeling of not having anywhere clear to go, that made me think they were indeed a little bit lost. But this is the romantic part of the book I did enjoy. There is something nostalgic about it, the unfulfilled love between Brett and Jake and the uncertainty of their futures, of what will become of them or what they will have to settle for. 

I could say that without the bullring scenes I would have loved this book. But then, would  it have been the same book? Would it be Hemingway without his romantic ideas of masculinity and aggressiveness? 

When I wrote my review of A Moveable Feast I said I could either love or hate the next book I read of Hemingway. I didn’t know it could actually be both. What I’m certain of now is that I will always have strong feelings about his books. I’m pretty sure I will never say “meeeh” to describe them. 

Despite the whole bullfighting thing and the macho ideas of masculinity, I still want to read more. He writes beautifully, that I can most definitely say. 

Les Liaisons Dangereuses - Pierre Chordelos de Laclos

“Pour vous hommes, les défaites ne sont que de succés de moins. Dans cette partie si inégale, notre fortune est de ne pas perdre et votre malheur de ne pas gagner.”

The Marquise of Meurteuil to the Vicomte of Valmont

Boy, this book sure shows how human nature is able sink very, very low. This would be a scandalous story in any period of time but in that specific context it is even worse.

Set in the pre-revolutionary France, the Marquise of Meurteuil and the Vicomte of Valmont are two former lovers who use sex as a weapon to control, humiliate and take advantage of others. They consider it a game and are proud of being the best at it. Because this book consists of letters, the reader is able to see how the two of them change their tone, opinions and manner of addressing, depending on the person to whom they are writing. They are incredibly manipulative and wicked, taking pride on the amount of lives they have ruined. 

The Marquise is the evil mastermind of the story. She is even more skillful than Valmont and a greater hypocrite and liar. She doesn’t really consider his conquests as victories because he has nothing to lose, unlike her, who has a reputation to protect. 

Valmont is a handsome, seductive man who is very proud of the amount of women he has “conquered”. I have seen this type of character (or men) before but what makes him different is how much he actually enjoys ruining his victims. It is not enough to “possess” them, he must ruin them too, otherwise it is not a challenge. 

[Spoiler Alert!] The story begins with the Marquise wanting to take revenge against his former lover, Monsieur de Gercourt, for dumping her. She decides to do this by “ruining” his future wife, the young and innocent Cécile de Volanges. She asks Valmont to seduce Cécile but he refuses because he is too busy pursuing his own goals: he wants to seduce the very uptight and virtuous Madame de Tourvel. She is THE unattainable woman and therefore the best and greatest challenge to him; he wants to become a legend for having seduced the most virtuous woman known to their society.

The Marquise does not believe he will succeed and makes a bet with him: if he succeeds and is able to prove it, she will spend the night with him. He accepts and they both start working on their corresponding tasks. The Marquise discovers Cécile is actually in love with the Chévalier Danceny, a handsome but penniless nobleman, and decides to “help” Cécile with this forbidden love, with the purpose of getting her to give herself to him.

As the plot develops we see how both the Marquise and Valmont achieve their goals. Madame de Tourvel finally gives in after months of resisting Valmont’s advances and declarations of love and Valmont rapes Cécile as a punishment to her mother for gossiping to Madame de Tourvel of his previous adventures (and yes, he rapes her even though Cécile later says, in other words, that she kind of enjoyed it. This is still rape). The problem is that they end up driving each other to destruction. Valmont really falls in love with Madame de Tourvel but the Marquise tricks him into leaving her by making him feel he is no longer the great seducer he once was.

When Valmont fights Danceny in a duel and is mortally wounded, he gives Danceny all the letters telling the truth about the Marquise (and him). Thus, the Marquise is exposed and scorned and ends up fleeing France, ruined and deformed (smallpox!).

Madame de Tourvel first goes crazy and becomes delusional when Valmont leaves her and then dies when she hears the news of his death. Cécile returns to the convent and takes the robes because she is forever ruined. Yay for all the happy endings! :S

There are several aspects of the story that stood out for me:

Even though women, as always, had a very difficult position, the Marquise played skillfully with it. She was the ultimate hypocrite, preaching and appearing one thing and acting the complete opposite. I enjoyed her letters the most, so scheming but so smart at the same time. I enjoyed the tone with which she addressed Valmont, always teasing him or lecturing him in some way.

I liked Valmont's character at first but does someone else also finds his letters to Madame de Tourvel creepy? He was supposedly acting as a man desperately in love but he rather came off as a stalker. And I don’t say this because I knew he was reading her mail or having her followed, I say it because his letters to her were those of an obsessed stalker; a very well educated and eloquent one, but a stalker nonetheless. Why did she fall in love with him? I would have been scared to death of this man.

The idea of “shame” is very present at all times; the shame of ruined women and their shutting out of society. Cécile was raped by Valmont but it would have been considered a sin that ruined her and made her no longer suitable for marriage  She was the victim and the one punished for it. I guess victim-blaming and slut-shaming is nothing new to the world. It's been going on for centuries.  

The one thing that I found really annoying was the way Madame de Tourvel died. She is supposed to have died due to a broken heart. I know this was written at a time when people thought women were so frail and delicate they could actually die of shame, sadness or heartbreak, but I found it way too melodramatic and it kind of pissed me off. 

Also, the ending was too short and fast considering how much time it took for the story to develop. The consequences for Valmont and Meurteuil are as great as their crimes, but it was just too easy. I don’t understand Valmont’s final action: was it justice or revenge? Was it to stop the Marquise from doing more harm or was it to get even with her? I have to admit that at the beginning of the book I was rooting for Valmont, but then I started disliking him. My opinion is that he gave the letters to Danceny out of spite, not because he wanted to make amends. People don’t change like that and he was horrible. 

This is a great book, a very scary portrayal of the pre-revolutionary France and the depravity of its aristocracy. It also shows the difficult and particular position of women in a depraved society. It is definitely a story of extremes: extreme wickedness, depravity, hypocrisy and extreme naivety and virtuousness. I consider this to be the complete opposite of a love story. 

I would definitely recommend this book to others, especially those who enjoy epistolary novels, rich literary French and learning more about the aristocratic France before the revolution.

Stalker!

PS. I have seen the film adaptation with Glenn Close and John Malkovich. She is perfect as the Marquise of Meurteuil, so cold and scheming. I don’t really see Malkovich as the handsome seducer that Valmont is, though he does manage to grasp perfectly the stalker thing. The part when he says to Madame de Tourvel (played by Michelle Pfeiffer) that he “adooooooooores her” was creepy as hell.

La inquilina de Wildfell Hall - Anne Brontë

La semana pasada terminé de leer La inquilina de Wildfell Hall. Tenía expectativas muy altas para este libro por todo lo que había escuchado y todas mis expectativas fueron completamente superadas. Creo que Anne se ha convertido en mi Brontë favorita, a pesar que no sabía que podía admirar a alguien más que a Charlotte. Ella está en mi lista de escritores épicos, los que me emocionan demasiado, de los que nunca me canso, los que me inspiran y me hacen querer ser una escritora. Ahora Anne ha ingresado a esa lista y se ha robado el primer puesto.

La inquilina de Wildfell Hall es una novela compuesta de cartas escritas por Gilbert Markham a su amigo acerca de esta misteriosa mujer que se ha mudado a Wildfell Hall. Él escribe sus propios pensamientos y recuerdos pero también copia del diario de la mujer misteriosa, conocida como Helen Graham al comienzo de la historia. De esta manera tenemos dos perspectivas diferentes de la historia y la parte del diario de Helen es súper íntima y conmovedora.

Esta no es una típica historia victoriana: es cruda, realista e intensa. Creó tal escándalo en su tiempo por retar las ideas contemporáneas de decencia que incluso Charlotte sintió la necesidad de suprimir el libro después que Anne murió.

Algunas personas dicen que La inquilina de Wildfell Hall es el primer libro feminista. Yo no estoy necesariamente de acuerdo con esto porque no creo que esa fuera la intención de Anne. Creo que ella escribía de manera muy clara, no había ninguna propaganda intencional escondida en el libro. Ella escribía lo que consideraba correcto, lo que debía ser. El hecho de que la heroína de la novela deje a su marido vicioso y abusivo no es un mensaje o argumento feminista. Es lo que ella pensaba que era verdad y correcto. Muchos de los críticos de la época se quejaron de la manera en que lo "feo" estaba retratado, se sintieron ofendidos por tener que leer algo tan desagradable para sus gustos decentes. Ella les dijo: "Cuando tenemos que ver con el vicio y personalidades violentas, yo mantengo que es mejor representarlas como son de verdad y no como les gustaría aparecer".

Es interesante que la hermana que todos pensaron era la menos talentosa haya escrito este libro, tan adelantado a su tiempo, tan poderoso y completo. Me he estado preguntado, ¿por qué es que todos la ignoraron de esa manera? ¿Qué la hacía diferente a sus hermanas? 

Hay que admitir que el estilo de Anne es menos romántico, tiene menos imágenes poéticas y los destinos de sus heroínas son normales. Entonces, ¿es que en esta época, la necesidad por algún romance dramático era tan importante que una realista como Anne, que escribía las cosas tal como las veía, sin adornarlas para hacerlas más agradables al lector o a ella misma, fue subestimada y olvidada? 

Encontré este comic el otro día (fuente: Hark! A vagrant). Es una exageración y no es muy justo con Charlotte y Emily pero hay algo de verdad en él y ciertamente me hizo reír. Mi opinión es que esta es la razón por la que Anne no es tan popular como Charlotte o Emily: ella no fantaseaba e idealizaba tanto como ellas. 

Cuando leí la biografía de la familia Brontë por Juliet Barker no sabía mucho sobre Anne. Había leído Agnes Grey y me había encantado pero seguía prefiriendo Jane Eyre. Luego, cuando descubrí un poco más de la familia, pude ver lo que Anne quizo transmitir cuando escribió Agnes Grey. Todo el mundo siempre ha pensado que Charlotte fue una revolucionaria porque fue la primera en escribir sobre una mujer simple y normal como la heroína de una novela, pero fue Anne la que lo hizo primero con Agnes Grey. Este libro representa mucho mejor la realidad y las dificultades de ser una institutriz. 

Ahora pienso que los libros que ella escribió van muy bien con su personalidad. Ella era la tranquila, la bebé de la familia, la que todos parecían olvidar siempre, pero era su pilar silencioso. Tenía una fuerza increíble, un sentido del deber que la hizo querer educarse para poder ganarse la vida. Anne fue la que trabajó más, a pesar que probablemente lo hizo en las peores condiciones. Ella dijo que Agnes Grey estaba basado en la verdad y según esto, los niños de las familias para las que trabajó eran la plaga.

La inquilina de Wildfell Hall hizo que mi corazón latiera más rápido mientras leía no por un romance, una aventura o cualquier otra cosa parecida. Lo hizo latir porque podía ver el talento detrás del libro, la mujer centrada que lo escribió sin buscar fama o aceptación. Anne escribió lo que era verdad para ella. Fue una experiencia completamente distinta a las de leer Jane Eyre o Wuthering Heights.

Si hay algo que no me gustó tanto en el libro fue el final relativamente corto, en comparación con el crecimiento y la progresión de la historia. No me parece que la relación entre Helen y Gilbert se haya desarrollado lo suficiente como para hacerme creer que son el final feliz de cada uno. ¿Por que Helen se enamoraría de Gilbert? Entiendo porque podría pasar en la dirección contraria, ella era una mujer hermosa y misteriosa, pero ¿quién era él para ella? Era un hombre simple y normal. Y de repente esa es la clave. Después de sufrir tanto con un "hombre extraordinario", extraordinariamente encantador, rico, apuesto, pero también extraordinariamente borracho, abusivo y manipulador, de repente ella quería algo normal, un hombre bueno y decente. No estoy segura. Todavía no me parece que la relación sea verosímil pero es una pequeña manchita en un libro realmente bueno.

Cuando terminé de leerlo me sentí triste. Triste de que ahora ya había leido los dos únicos que Anne Brontë escribió, yo quería más. Me pareció injusto que tuviera que morir tan joven. Sin embargo ella murió de la misma manera tranquila en la que vivió. Hasta el final, ella fue la serena y comprensiva. (Barker, 2012) “Incluso cuando estaba muriendo, sus preocupaciones eran para con los demas: al ver a Charlotte casi incapaz de contener su pena, Anne susurró: 'Se valiente, Charlotte; se valiente'. Consciente hasta el final, Anne murió tranquila y delicadamente a alrededor de las dos de la tarde del lunes 28 de mayo de 1849." 

Planeo releer Agnes Grey en las próximas semanas. Creo que será un experiencia completamente distinta sabiendo más de ella ahora. Quiero animar a los demas a que lean y disfruten de las obras de Anne y que superen el prejuicio de que ella era la menos talentosa. No creo que alguna de ellas deba ser etiquetada como la menos talentosa, todas eran diferentes y geniales en su propia manera y cada una de ellas contribuyó en el cuestionamiento de las tradiciones y convenciones victorianas y la forma prestablecida en que se suponía las mujeres debían escribir.

Y para los que adoren a las Brontës tanto como yo: El restaurado museo Brontë (en inglés).

The Tenant of Wildfell Hall - Anne Brontë

I finished reading The Tenant of Wildfell Hall last week. I had high expectations for this book because of everything I had heard of it and all my expectations were completely exceeded. I think Anne might have become my favorite Brontë, even though I didn’t know I could admire someone more than Charlotte. She’s in my list of epic writers, the ones I get too excited about, the ones I never tire of, the ones that inspire me and make me want to be a writer myself. Now Anne has entered that list, going directly to the first place.

The Tenant of Wildfell Hall is a novel formed by letters from Gilbert Markham to his friend about this mysterious new woman living in Wildfell Hall. He writes his own thoughts and recollections but he also copies from the diary of the mysterious woman herself, known as Helen Graham at the beginning of the story. This way we get two different perspectives of the story. And the part of Helen’s diary is extremely intimate and touching.

This is no conventional Victorian story. It’s raw, realistic, intense. It created such a scandal in its time because it challenged the contemporary ideas of decency that even Charlotte felt the need to suppress it after Anne died.

Some say The Tenant of Wildfell Hall is the first feminist book. I don’t necessarily agree with that because I don’t think that was Anne’s intention. I think she wrote very straight forward, she didn’t have any intentional propaganda hidden in the book. She wrote what she though was right, what should be. The fact that the heroine of the novel leaves her dissolute, abusive husband was not a feminist message, plot, or whatever. Its is what she thought was true and right. A lot of critics at the time complained about the way the “ugly” was portrayed. They felt offended for having to read something so disagreeable to their decent tastes. She said to them “When we have to do with vice and vicious characters, I maintain it is better to depict them as they really are than as they would like to appear”.

It is interesting that this book, so ahead of its time, so powerful and complete, was written by the sister who everyone thought was the least talented. I’ve been wondering, what was it that made everyone disregard Anne in such a way? What made her different from her sisters? 

I’ll admit that Anne’s writing is less romantic, has less poetic imagery, the fates of her heroines are normal. Is it that at the time, the need for some dramatic romance was so important that a realist like Anne, who wrote things as she saw them, without embellishing them to make them more agreeable to the reader or herself, was underestimated and forgotten? 

I found this comic the other day (source: Hark! A vagrant). It is an exaggeration and it’s not really fair to Charlotte and Emily but there is some insight to it. It certainly made me laugh. My opinion is that this is the reason Anne is not as popular as Charlotte or Emily. She didn’t romanticize as much as them. 

When I read the Juliet Barker biography of the Brontë family I didn’t know much about Anne. I had read Agnes Grey and loved it but I always preferred Jane Eyre. Then, as I found out a little more of the family I saw what Anne meant when she wrote Agnes Grey. Everyone always thought Charlotte was a revolutionary because she was the first one to write about a plain, ordinary woman as the heroine of a novel, but it was Anne who did that first with Agnes Grey. This book portrays much better the reality and the difficulties of being a governess. 

I now think the books she wrote fit perfectly with her personality. She was quiet, the baby of the family, the one everyone seemed to forget, but she was its silent pillar. She had a core of steel, a sense of duty that made her want to get an education that would let her earn her own living. She was the one who worked the most, even though she probably did it in the worst conditions. She said Agnes Grey was based on the truth and according to that, the children of the families she worked for were the plague.

The Tenant of Wildfell Hall made my heart beat faster as I was reading it, but not because of a romance, an adventure or anything else you would expect. It was because I could see the genius behind it, the down to earth woman who wrote it without seeking fame or acceptance. She wrote what was true to her. It was a completely different experience than the ones of reading Jane Eyre or Wuthering Heights.

If there is something I didn’t like that much of this book was the relatively short ending, compared to the build-up of the story. I don’t think the relationship between Helen and Gilbert developed enough to make me believe they were each other’s happy ending. Why would Helen fall in love with Gilbert? I can see why it would happen the other way around, she was a beautiful, mysterious woman, but who was he to her? He was a plain, ordinary man. And maybe that is the key. After suffering so much with an “extraordinary man”, extraordinarily charming, rich, handsome but also extraordinarily drunk, abusive and manipulative, maybe she wanted normal. A good, decent, normal guy. I don’t know. I still don’t think that relationship is believable, but is just a small thing in a great, great book.

When I finished reading it I felt sad. Sad that now I had already read the only two books Anne Brontë ever wrote. I wanted more. It seemed unfair she had to die so young. But she died as calmly as she lived. She was, until the very end, the collected, supportive one. (Barker, 2012) “Even while she lay dying, her thought was for others: seeing Charlotte barely able to restrain her grief, Anne whispered, ‘Take courage, Charlotte; take courage’. Conscious to the last, Anne died, very calmly and gently, at about two o’clock in the afternoon on Monday, 28 May 1849.” 

I will reread Agnes Grey in the coming weeks. I feel it will be a completely different experience knowing more about her now. I want to encourage everyone to read and enjoy Anne's work and to overcome the prejudice that she was the least talented. I don’t think any of them should be labeled as the least talented, they were different and great in their own way and each of them contributed to the challenging of the Victorian traditions and conventions and the way women were supposed to write.

And for those of you who love the Brontës as much as I do, check this out: The newly restored Brontë Museum.

A Moveable Feast - Ernest Hemingway

I've heard so many different opinions about Hemingway. People either love him or hate him, according to my experience. It seems as if he causes the same passionate reactions that characterized him during his life. 

I read The Old Man and The Sea when I was fourteen and I hated it. It made me suffer so much for the old man while I was reading it, I could almost feel his blisters on my hands. I remember I closed the book and said “I hate Hemingway”. I read it during a time when I was very sensitive and didn't want to feel that much (oh, those teenage years). Looking back, I think it must have been a good book if I became so involved with it. I have to add it to my list of re-reads, I don’t remember much except the impact it had on me. 

I didn't want to read Hemingway again because of that experience, but a couple of years ago someone convinced me to read his short stories and I loved them. I thought they were brilliant and I tried to analyze them and break them down to find out what was it that made me want to read them over and over again. I decided to give his books another chance and I chose A Moveable Feast to start with. 

Within my limited experience reading Hemingway, he always makes me feel a lot with so very little. His writing is unadorned and simple. It felt as if someone was speaking to me, as if he was sitting with me, drinking a glass of wine, telling me his stories about Paris in the twenties. It was so touching, so beautiful to me, specially the parts related to Hadley, his first wife. This book gave me the impression that it was a love letter for someone who had been lost. He wrote it at the end of his life so I imagine that looking back to those early years made him nostalgic for the days when he was poor but happy. I actually think this book was meant to be an apology to Hadley, that despite it all he was never happier than with her and she was the only one who knew him for real.

Ernest Hemingway, Hadley and Sylvia Beach in front of Shakespeare and Co.

The book also gave me a glimpse of what was he like as a young writer, when he was still learning about his craft and how to convey the stories within him. I've dealt many times with writer’s block and become so frustrated that I wondered if maybe I’m not made for this. But when I read that even him struggled with this sometimes, it comforted me. Again, it felt as if he was speaking directly to me: 

“Do not worry. You have always written before and you will write now. All you have to do is write one true sentence. Write the truest sentence that you know.”

When I sat down to write the review for this book my mind went blank. I didn't understand why I was having a hard time writing the review of a book that moved me so. And then I realized that was the problem. That’s why this isn't really a review. I’m explaining here why it was so moving to me. I’m writing what is true to me.

Needless is to say that I've changed my mind about him and I’m ready to read more of his works. I plan to read The Sun Also Rises very soon and I don’t know how I will react to it. I could love it or I could hate it. Either way, I’m pretty sure I will have strong feelings about it, that’s the one thing I can count on when it comes to Hemingway.

A Woman of No Importance - Oscar Wilde

I really like Oscar Wilde. I have enjoyed all the plays and stories I have read from him. Unfortunately, I didn’t like A Woman of No Importance as much as I liked his other work.

It is not that I disliked the play, it had fun dialogue and witty banter but I thought it was just not as good as I expected and the only expression that comes to mind to describe how I felt when I finished reading it, is “meeehhh”.

I know, I should not use “meeehh” to describe anything in a review, but that is exactly what I said out loud in the last page.

The plot has everything one could expect from an Oscar Wilde play. It has dark comedy; it mocks the upper class of Victorian England and has great dialogue.  

[Spoiler Alert!] Lord Illingworth discovers that his young secretary is in fact the son he abandoned. He sees his formed lover, Mrs. Arbuthnot, for the first time after twenty years and she obviously resents him. They both realize that their past is catching up to them and it is inevitable for their son, Gerald, to discover the truth. 

The play highlights the position of women at the time, specially related to pre-marital relations and having children outside the marriage. One could say it is a feminist work. It certainly shows how a woman’s life was ruined when she became pregnant before getting married, while a man could continue as if nothing had happened. I could definitely perceive what Wilde thought of these conservative conventions and prejudices and how unfair women were treated.

I think this is a  story that has been told many times before, in Wilde's plays as well. Despite of that, I can’t help feeling that something is missing. There are all these characters: Mrs. Allonby, Mrs. Lady Hunstanton, Lady Pontefract, the Archdeacon, Lady Stutfield, Mr. Kelvil, etc. They all represent different sides of the Victorian upper class society, which Wilde mocks so very much, but aside from that I can’t actually see any other purpose for them in the story. Maybe there’s something I’m not getting, my own context being so far away from England, even more from Victorian England, that I might be missing some “inside joke”.

There is a lot of talking before the climax of the play arrives and even then I found it rather dull and forced. I hated when Gerald tried to convince his mother to marry Lord Illingworth. The drama created after Gerald discovered the truth seems forced and unnatural. Honor is an important thing but how much of an idiot you have to be to try to convince your own mother to marry the man that treated her and her child like trash. Or maybe that is what Wilde was trying to portray, the absurdity of the social conventions people had to live with.

On the other hand, there are some remarkable moments that I did enjoy, for example:

“Men always want to be a woman’s first love. That is their clumsy vanity. We women have a more subtle instinct about things. What we like is to be a man’s last romance”.

“One has never heard his name before in the whole course of one’s life, which speaks volumes for a man, nowadays”.

That is obviously brilliant writing. A Woman of No Importance is not a bad play, according to my humble opinion, it is a good play. But after what I have already read from Oscar Wilde, good is definitely not what I expected. I might sound like my former ballet teacher, but I was not expecting good, I was expecting great.

And now here I am feeling like an idiot for criticizing the work of one of the greatest playwrights ever.

I recommend this play to those who love Wilde and have read his other work before. To those who haven’t read anything from him, I suggest starting with The Importance of Being Earnest, An Ideal Husband or The Picture of Dorian Gray.

The Woman in White - Wilkie Collins

This is my first review since I joined The Classics Club, yay! 

I think I chose a great book to start this year. I’m a big fan of detective and suspense stories (I think they were called “sensation novels” at the time this book was written) but I’m also very hard to please when it comes to them. I’m very happy to say that this is one of the best I have ever read. 

The Woman in White was written by Wilkie Collins in 1859. It tells the story of a horrible conspiracy full of mystery, secrets, danger, love and all the ingredients you could look for in a Gothic-style suspense novel.

I’m not going to spoil the story for those who haven’t read it yet. Walter Hartright is a drawing teacher who meets a mysterious woman dressed in white. He helps her to reach safety and doesn’t expect to ever see her again. He takes a job and moves away from London and as new and exciting events start to unfold, the woman in white appears in the story as the key to solve everything.

I really like that the story was written similar to an epistolary novel. The different styles, tones and points of view of the different people narrating it really made the book so much more interesting.  I loved Miss Halcombe’s part of the story; I think is the most accomplished part of the book. I became so involved in this part that I gasped and said “Nooooo!” out loud many times while reading the extracts of her diary. 

I very much enjoyed Mr. Fairlie’s character, even though he is an obnoxious man. It was really fun actually hearing him speak in my mind, with his affected manners and constantly posing as the victim of absolutely everything and everyone. He is positively ridiculous and I admit I laughed with his absurdities.

Count Fosco’s character is also very interesting. He could be extremely joyful, amiable and sensitive and also Machiavellian, cold and cynical. He is the one person of this whole story that I would be actually terrified to meet. 

I didn’t like Laura Fairlie’s character, too much of a damsel in distress for me, the exact opposite of her sister, Marian Halcombe. It seemed to me that Laura’s participation throughout the story was limited to crying, panicking and being taken care of by Marian and Walter. I also hated Madame Fosco’s robot-like manners. She remembered me of radical religious fanatics, but instead of being obsessed with religion or God, she was obsessed with her husband. 

There are some very surprising turns of events and up to the final pages of the book, the future of the main characters is uncertain. 

I must say, even though I admired how everything was explained, that every piece of information had its purpose and that at the end of the book we understand absolutely everything that happened, up to the last detail, I didn’t exactly like the way the solution was obtained. I have to be ambiguous here to avoid spoiling the story, but I was hoping that some public punishment or justice would be made and that is incomplete, in my opinion.

In conclusion, I definitely recommend the book. It is one of the best suspense novels I’ve read in a long time, very well thought of, with every little detail having a purpose. It is a real page-turner and I understand why it was called a sensation novel. It really catches the reader and doesn’t let go until the mystery is discovered.