|
|
Post by reluedders on Jul 11, 2024 18:22:40 GMT
During my "bad faith" discussion a couple weeks ago, the question came up between me and Prof. Nemmers about whether this novel can be considered existentialist or not. I don't believe that it has as many properties as the other novels we've read so far, but I do believe that it has some existential properties.
First, Tony does question his faith in God throughout this novel, however, it's not that he's questioning whether God exists, but whether the Catholic God he believes in is the only true God. I'm not sure if that qualifies as an existentialist question or not... thoughts?
Second, I didn't really see any parts where any of the characters questioned their being/existence in this world. Did anyone?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Nemmers on Jul 12, 2024 17:27:39 GMT
Glad you brought this up, Renee-- it's at the very top of my mind, and I was pretty hesitant to include this novel in the class in the first place! The reason I did was that I felt this was the most available and accessible Chicanx novel that I could find. It seems, at least from a couple of weeks' research on my part, that no one has really thought that Chicanos (Mexican Americans) might have had existentialist experiences and/or mindsets; like Native Americans, they've mostly been ignored in this realm. So, I"m not sure whether there is a strain of Chicano existentialism, but I thought this novel would be the first place I would look for it!
I'm only a few chapters in, and have already posted about what I found in chapter #2, with Lupito being killed. One thing I can say so far is that this seems to be very straightforward-- not absurd at all, at least in the events that are happening and the way the story is told. Many of our novels have had events that seemed to be nonsensical; they've been surreal or hidden or contradictory. But here everything seems logical or at least to progress in a natural way, and that's a bit jarring for me.
I will be paying close attention to the faith aspect that you mention, as that's one thing that caught my eye from the summary: the supposed "loss of faith" of our narrator. On its face that would be the most existentialist theme... I'll have to keep reading to find out whether it's accurate or not!
|
|
|
|
Post by mjunious on Jul 15, 2024 3:45:06 GMT
If I were reading this novel independently, I do not think I would have instinctively classified it as existential, but I can see how it comes into focus looking through the existential lens. The main character's existential dilemma differs from those of characters we have previously encountered in the novels of the class thus far in that they, typically, have been lost and are looking for meaning in their lives. They are burdened with the phenomena of an anxiety of seemingly infinite possibilities, as we have discussed in the class. Antonio however, has a few expectations laid out in front of him: becoming a priest, as his mother wants, on one hand, and following down the path of his brothers, seemingly lost in the eyes of their family because of their experiences in the war and other circumstances life has thrown at them. Antonio's character, from an existentialist's point of view, is struggling with a felling of rebellion from the presuppositions of his future. I wonder, as I continue towards the end of the novel, if his family will embrace a role as Ultima's apprentice, as an alternative to the life of a literal Catholic priest, since he is still doing sort of good deeds for the community, while maintaining a strong connection to the spiritual world, and because his family has such respect for Ultima.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rylee Wenzel on Jul 17, 2024 23:36:04 GMT
I think this does qualify as existentialist! Questioning the world around you and how things work is inherently existentialist. So, by questioning if the Catholic God is the only God, falls under that. I think this is something that can be interesting and scary to think about, depending on what you believe. Who's to say any one God is the "right" one? What defines this? I think this is what Tony is questioning.
|
|
|
|
Post by dcomeaux on Jul 18, 2024 0:03:12 GMT
I believe it would also qualify as an existentialist piece. It isn't as "in your face" as the other novels we have read but it certainly has some aspects of existentialism. Antonio is constantly questioning the Catholic religion. In Chapter Vientiuno, he talks with Cico and even asks him, "Does one have to choose?...Is it possible to have both?" (speaking about the Catholic God and the Golden Carp). That along with his struggle to figure out what path he is to follow, whether his mothers, his fathers, or his own, in my opinion, would certainly qualify the novel to fall under the category of existentialism.
|
|
|
|
Post by connorswauger on Jul 18, 2024 4:20:31 GMT
During my "bad faith" discussion a couple weeks ago, the question came up between me and Prof. Nemmers about whether this novel can be considered existentialist or not. I don't believe that it has as many properties as the other novels we've read so far, but I do believe that it has some existential properties. First, Tony does question his faith in God throughout this novel, however, it's not that he's questioning whether God exists, but whether the Catholic God he believes in is the only true God. I'm not sure if that qualifies as an existentialist question or not... thoughts? Second, I didn't really see any parts where any of the characters questioned their being/existence in this world. Did anyone? I would think of Antonio’s journey as akin to absurdism in the way that he questions the entire concept of God and his presence in the world. In his debate with his friend, Antonio states that God is everywhere and is all around us, but then he is also met with the realization that God would be with the girls in the brothel as well. God would have been present while Uncle Lucas was cursed or when Lupito committed murder and was later killed. I think the existential aspect is the distance that is created between Antonio and his religion for him to then come back to faith but on his own terms as he considers the existence of other entities. |
|
