Emily, you really don't need to be afraid to post.
See? I'm posting first.
I'm a little ways in and I can't help but notice the way Oscar is always using the N word. I don't mind it but I always notice it.
What purpose do you think his use of the word serves?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Bimbs, I too was noticing the frequent use of the N-Word. And it begs the question, who is our narrator? At page 230-ish, I know it's not Oscar, not his sister or mother, but who is this guy? And why is it that when narrative voices change to Lola's part of the story, the narrative voice retains this masculine, sexist undertone that I see in other parts of the book?
ReplyDeleteI have finished the book so I can speak to who the narrator is (but you'll figure it out sooner or later) -- the narration is tricky because its style and tone changes but conforms to this character's nature. Right after I finished the book I started thinking about how different it would be if it was narrated by Oscar. I don't think it's a literary imperative to have an outside narrator to create difference though -- Oscar is obviously self-conscious enough, though I think a book narrated by Oscar would be really annoying (just personal stylistic preference though -- I'm not a big sci-fi person).
ReplyDelete"You really want to know what being an X-Man feels like? Just be a smart bookish boy of color in a contemporary U.S. ghetto. Mamma mia! Like having bat wings or a pair of tentacles growing out of your chest." (22)
Although Oscar isn't the narrator, the story is so mythical, it blurs the lines of family history, historical legend, and sci-fi. The narrator alludes to this too: "In Santo Domingo a story is not a story unless it casts a supernatural shadow." (245-246) It's really interesting how these themes converge with Oscar and the Cabrals.
ReplyDelete(Bimbola I don't know how to post which is why I'm commenting. Sorry)
HI FRIENDS!
ReplyDeletethe word does call into question both the authenticity of the narrator, and by proxy his author, as well as we, the readers. this contestation and discomfort coming from any/all of the markers/markedness of race, class, gender, sexuality, nationality -- which combinations/histories/legacies make it right and which make it less so?
also, what does it mean for díaz, as author, to 01. use the term, and 02. deploy it with the ending of -er instead of -a.
regardless, using the term does assuredly inscribe and reinforce the masculine heteronormative tone of the novel in general.