Wednesday, September 1, 2010

Fiesta 1980 [Junot Diaz] and Jeffrey Eugenides


After listening to Eugenides read “Extreme Solitude” aloud in his own voice, this chapter took on a more severe kind of timeliness – though, interestingly, the chapter didn’t deal very deeply with the concept of tone. I guess it was already wrapped up in diction and uses of dialog. Either way, when I read “Extreme Solitude” I recognized subtle humor, but never laughed really. The jokes were dark or ironic and seemed laced with the dynamics of a relationship – a bigger meaning – not just a tension relief for the reader. However, when he read the story Tuesday night, he had the room laughing. His tone of voice, inflections, and silly accents hadn’t come across to me in my own head, and I can’t figure out if that’s due to a lack of imagination on my part, or ambiguity on his. The story still held its emotional resonance with me when he read it, and I teared up at the same spot as I had before, but overall everything was more okay, the grim of Leonard’s apartment became more acceptable somehow when a whole room giggled knowingly at the dirty details. Usually though, there isn’t that audience participation when reading or writing. A group of people who came all this way, took the time, want to like you. Instead, there has to be a reliance on just letting go. Hope the reader will get the point without ever being so bland as to out rightly say what that point is. To carry that burden, and a plot, there are characters.
            I like our textbook because it takes away that romantic veil and shows you how the trick is done, but doesn’t make writing seem any less fun or fulfilling or full of possible variations. Burroway writes that the reader “wants a chance to fall in love, too”. (Is that a correct place for the period in that particular sentence?) Picking and choosing what scenes to play out and what to gloss over will determine what a reader might remember from a book – and if it’s not remembered, it might as well have never happened.
            Diction is important. What a character says is basically a reveal of who they want you to think they are, or who they want to believe they are. This may or may not be in conflict with who they actually are. That conflict of character, the self or between another, is what creates tension/conflict/contrast and either reveals information or pushes along the story.
            Back to the chapter: I have to admit the two authors who have influenced my dialog most are JK Rowling and Chuck Palahniuk. JK Rowling taught me to bridge scenes and chapters with a line of dialog and how to use said invisibly, or no tags at all. Saying more by saying nothing – what is left unsaid somehow means more. How to convey action between commas filled with words.  Palahniuk brought to life the internal dialog and the monolog. The turn of phrase that seems revolutionary, but is still a madman’s thoughts. It’s the “Holden Caulfield Effect” – you begin to love/sympathize someone because you get in their head – you feel like you know them – even if they are fundamentally flawed.
I was happy when Burroway added a comment about “provincial curiosities”. A writer isn’t just what s/he is able to put down into words on paper – but especially today – are an image in and of themselves. I like it because Burroway earlier gave three passages meant to convey a great deal about character in a short amount of lines. Though they did reveal what the characters might have thought of other people or themselves, I’m sensitive about making a mental image of them because I don’t want to fall back on dull stereotypes. Of course, I guess that’s the line that must be drawn between preaching and writing – something I need to be mindful of. It is supposed to be entertaining after all, not merely informative or somehow explicative of a world view.
Fiesta 1980 by Junot Diaz has a unique sort of dialog. He doesn’t include quotation marks, and I personally think this adds to the fluidity of the piece. Language is fluid, and as this is a memory, it makes sense that spoken word and what was understood run into one another. Sometimes it made it hard to follow, but only if you were going to be tested or something – which obviously wasn’t the writer’s intention. Really, you could say the entire piece is the spoken words of the narrator, and so perhaps it would all be in between two huge quotation marks. The language “like the wind through a tree”, “with the sun sliding out of the sky like spit off a wall” – that comes from the older self of the narrator and sets his mood. He is recounting something personal – something beautiful yet tragic or disordered.
Furthermore, the story is really being spoken in Spanish, as is evident when he says “Rafa said to me in English”. There are little glimpses of the language scattered through the piece, cognates that are somewhat easy to put into context for an English speaking reader. This choice has a dual purpose. It simultaneously draws you in, but also keeps you at bay from the real emotional center. Like a person holding their hand out, their palm flat on your chest, but at arm’s length as if to say “stop, no further”. This actually mimics the character’s attitude toward his father’s infidelity, as he allows the situation to build up in him and distrusts even his family.  

No comments:

Post a Comment

Total Pageviews