onehund.JPEG
One Hundred Years of Solitude by Gabriel García Márquez


Cannonball Read / Anhelo

Book Reviews | November 24, 2009 | Comments (18)


Overall, I have to say that this was a wonderful book, and I can completely understand both why people claim it’s their favorite book and that it’s Márquez’s best work. I can’t say that I share that sentiment, but I also feel that I’ll have to go back and read it again so that I may fully enjoy it.

So, about the book.

To be perfectly honest, I was a little lost during the first 150 pages. I couldn’t fully comprehend what Márquez was trying to get at. See, normally I’m used to books that portray a focal character, and then from there, the new characters are introduced in relation to that character. Márquez doesn’t do that here. So, I spent about 150 pages a little baffled, a little confused. Then, I read the back cover, and everything fell into place. I was getting it the whole time.

Here’s what it says:

“One Hundred Years of Solitude tells the story of the rise and fall, birth and death of the mythical town of Macondo through the history of the Buendía family.”

Yes! That’s exactly what was going on. That whole time I was trying to ‘get’ what Márquez was doing, and the truth to enlightenment was right there on the back cover. And honestly, that’s all you need to know: this book tells the very very long story of the Buendía family. Now, I’m not going to give you a plot summary — it would be a great disservice to you as I would ruin the book for you, and it would be a grave disrespect to Márquez’s masterpiece as I would ruin the book period. There is no way that I can think of to truly capture the essence of this book. This book is an experience, and you need to experience it for yourself. What I will do is give you my reading of the book — parts of the book that stood out to me, elements that I thought were interesting, the like.

My first comment has to do with the characters … not the characters themselves, but their names. Márquez describes the entire Buendía family starting from the patriarchs, José Arcadio Buendía and Úrsula Iguarán, and tracks the entire family all the way down to the great-great-great-grandchildren (I hope I didn’t put too many ‘greats’). As if it wasn’t already difficult enough to remember so many characters, Márquez repeats many of the character names with slight variation. Now, that may be realistic in some families, some people have complexes — I know I do, all of my children will carry a variation of my name — other times it’s tradition, but come on, did you really have to do that to me? Let’s just give you an example with just one repeated name. There’s Colonel Aureliano Buendía, who has a child named Aureliano José and 17 other Aurelianos, let’s not forget Aureliano Segundo who has two grandchildren named Aureliano. Márquez was very kind to include a family tree … thanks, but no thanks.

As I kept reading, though, I realized that the repeated name thing actually works very well. Time isn’t a constant and clear element of the book, and it seems that events were layered and repeated. Through this process, personalities were recaptured by the newer generations, recaptured by characters with the same name. This also confused me at times, but when Márquez would return to stories and specific characters, everything seemed to fall into place. I liked that a lot about the book actually; it was very unique.

The one thing that stood out to me was Márquez’s leftism and how it was manifested in this novel. I have read two other Márquez novels before this one, which inspired my curiosity for the author. Through that time I learned that Márquez has leftist leanings and more recently I came across a book at Barnes and Noble titled Gabo and Fidel: Portrait of a Friendship. Upon reading that title, I wondered why I never observed these sentiments in his novels. After all, your art is an expression of your person, so therefore I should feel these sentiments to some capacity in his novels. This book does that with two things — the war and the banana plantations.

The War. There is a very long war that takes course through part of the novel in which Colonel Aureliano Buendía plays a crucial role. Márquez provides poignant social commentary as he provides his descriptions of the conflicting Liberal and Conservative movements. Through this discourse he reveals a lot of the contradictions of the conservatives which he describes through their paradoxical perceptions of religion, conflict, etc. In his ‘factual’ descriptions of what the liberal and conservative parties each represented, he subtly and almost subconsciously channels his beliefs to the reader; he creates this good (liberal) vs. evil (conservative) partiality in the process.

The Banana Plantations. The banana plantations scream American Imperialism. Right on, Márquez. The banana plantations, which are established and owned by foreigners, exploit the people, destroy the neighborhood, and in the process become a dirty symbol of evil. They are also the source of conflict as they have no regard for … anything.

This book was also very entertaining — it was funny, amusing, it would make me giggle. There are so many parts — whether through strange behavior i.e. eating mud, or romantic relationships i.e. literally dropping dead due to unrequited love (I think that happened?) — that were so exaggerated, you couldn’t help but be entertained.

Good book. I’d recommend it.

One last thing I will say before we part — has to do with a very ugly sticker on the front cover of this book. This book is a member of “Oprah’s Book Club.” The biggest turnoff. Ever. Reading a book from Oprah’s Book Club is like being told by the government to read a book. That’s why I hated most books in high school. You know people are going to read it just because Oprah recommended it. She got it like that. We vote for people because she says so. I can’t deny it. Now I love Oprah, and I’m actually quite sad that she will be announcing the end of her show — yes, I was raised on Oprah — but, we all know that if I were to write a book about safety pins and that somehow that lovely work of art managed to make its way onto Oprah’s Book Club list, I would turn into an instant mill-i-on-aire.

This review is part of the Cannonball Read series. For more of Anhelo’s reviews, check her blog.


Blog Trends from My Bunk 11/23/09 | Doctor Who End of Time





Comments

Oprah is popping up almost as frequently as Twilight around here...

Jonathan Franzen, author of The Corrections, was famously critical of being an Oprah book club selection and ended up getting his appearance on the show canceled (the books still sold well, though). The media blew it up into more of a feud than it probably was but he did raise interesting concerns (similar to what you said in the review) about how having that sticker on a book can change the reader's perception of the book, and not always in a good way. As the author, his book is very much his creation and the Oprah sticker is almost an encroachment on that making it 'his and Oprah's' and that it implies an endorsement, both by her of him, and by him or her.

"So much of reading is sustained in this country, I think, by the fact that women read while men are off golfing or watching football on TV or playing with their flight simulator or whatever. I worry — I'm sorry that it's, uh — I had some hope of actually reaching a male audience and I've heard more than one reader in signing lines now at bookstores say 'If I hadn't heard you, I would have been put off by the fact that it is an Oprah pick. I figure those books are for women. I would never touch it.' Those are male readers speaking. I see this as my book, my creation."
- Franzen (on NPR)

I think it's natural to have some skepticism whenever anyone has that kind of ability to influence the publishing market, but for the most part she recommends decent books. There are probably a lot of people who want to read but just don't know where to start and can't break out of their Sue Grafton and Danielle Steel rut. For them Oprah serves a valuable purpose. There really isn't a good populist source of book recommendations anymore.

Basically, more people need the Cannonball Read Community, because we are awesome.

Posted by: Yossarian at November 24, 2009 9:07 AM

One of my favorite books of all time. I frequently sum up its' wonder by saying, "Read it. A dingo really does eat the baby."

Posted by: Stacy D at November 24, 2009 9:43 AM

Basically, more people need the Cannonball Read Community, because we are awesome.

A truer statement was never made.

Posted by: Nicole at November 24, 2009 9:46 AM

Interesting review. Not sure it's my cup of tea but it does sound intriguing.

Oprah's new selection is "Say You're One of Them" by Uwem Akpan. Normally I care fuck all for her recommendations, but I read this one last year as part of Cannonball Read 1 and I highly recommend it. 5 stories set in Africa and told from the perspective of various children. It is HARROWING stuff but quite good. (The review I wrote last year was picked up on Pajiba too I think if anyone wants to seek it out.)

I'd like to take offense with Franzen's comment about male readers but for the most part he is dead on. My wife trades books constantly with her circle of friends. The most stimulating book conversation I get into regularly is on Pajiba or with her. I tell male friends I'm trying to read 52 books in a year (I'm on book 3 {Under the Dome}and 4 {Running With Scissors} but behind on my reviews) and they look at me like I'm insane.

Any other male Cannonballers getting that?

Posted by: TylerDFC at November 24, 2009 9:48 AM

Meh, Jonathan Franzen can kind of suck it. Once you write a book, you don't get to dictate the terms by which people enjoy it (or which people get to read it.)

I think it's pretty ridiculous that people would be put off by the "Oprah" sticker (the author of this post included.) I mean, Faulkner, Steinbeck, Tolstoy? Are these authors' works diminished, somehow, by association with Oprah? It's goofy to read a book because Oprah told you so*, but to pass on a book because Oprah recommended it is equally as asinine.

*Although I think book clubs, especially for complex works like Faulkner, are great.

Posted by: The Wandering Parakeet at November 24, 2009 9:57 AM

one hundred years of solitude, one hundred years of solitude
take one down, pass it around
ninety-nine years of solitude...

Posted by: Jim Doggie at November 24, 2009 10:16 AM

*Márquez was very kind to include a family tree … thanks, but no thanks.*

Actually, that family tree was added in the American publication. The original doesn't have it, and I'm pretty sure (but not completely sure) that the Spanish versions still don't have that family tree. Garcia Marquez is kind of intentionally making it difficult on the reader, I think it is a really beautiful and complex comment on how families are affected by what--and who--comes before. But TPTB thought it would be too difficult for small American minds to wrap their heads around and voila! A family tree that kind of neuters the magical realism.

Also, the banana plantation is very important! I teach that section in my classes on historical revisionism--that is a true incident that was left out of almost all of the history books by the government--one of the biggest "hush ups" in South America, and Garcia Marquez (why can't I figure out how to put accents in???) put it in his novel so that it wouldn't be forgotten, despite the government's best efforts.

Nice review on one of my favorites!

Posted by: couch and pants at November 24, 2009 10:43 AM

I love love love LOVE this book. LOVE. I'm actually quite curious to read it in English-- the Spanish is so unbelievably beautiful, the way his sentences flow together, the slang, the whole latin-americanness of it. I've been to a million towns exactly like Macondo. It could be the history of any Latin American country.

I LOVE this book. The only sad thing is that nothing Marquez wrote after is quite as great as this is. Chronicle of a Death foretold is my next favorite.

Posted by: figgy at November 24, 2009 10:54 AM

Ha, I didn't know the American version had a family tree. We read this for school (it's required reading EVERYWHERE) and one of our assignments was to make a giant family tree and put it up somewhere in the classroom. I also remember that this was the ONE book that everyone in the class loved reading. EVERYONE, even the dummies.

Posted by: figgy at November 24, 2009 10:56 AM

I think it's pretty ridiculous that people would be put off by the "Oprah" sticker

I have to admit that I'm one of those people. I guess there are just some things I want Oprah to leave the hell alone. My cousin bought this book solely because of the Oprah recommendation and called me in frustration: "What the fuck is this book about? Oprah said it was good!" I doubt Oprah would know magical realism if it bit her on her giant, self-important ass.

Posted by: Nicole at November 24, 2009 11:29 AM

I'm on the anti-sticker side as well. Not too sure if it's a childish anti-establishment "don't tell me what to do" thing or if I just don't like the idea of Oprah telling me what to read. On the positive side it does get some people to read books they normally wouldn't, even classics like Faulkner. That's got to be a good thing.

I really enjoy discovering a good book all by myself. It's like unearthing some glittering treasure while you're gardening. I also read books recommended by trusted friends. For many people, that's exactly how they think of Oprah. It's just that I don't consider Oprah one of my trusted friends.

I've re-read this book many times because it's beautiful and one of my all time favorites. Each time I pick-up new things. For a while, after Oprah first recommended it, I wouldn't read it in public because so many people kept interrupting me to talk about how much they loved it and wasn't it great that Oprah "discovered" it. Very irritating.

Really, can someone please direct those of use who would like to use correct accents someplace with instructions? It would be appreciated.

Posted by: Jiffyzen at November 24, 2009 1:13 PM

Nice review, I started reading this novel ages ago but the first 100 or so pages didn't catch my interest and friend of mine had the same problem recently. I've been wondering if maybe it was the translation since I've heard one of the English ones wasn't very good. I'll definitely have to give this one another go.
I've read a few things that have the Oprah sticker, and afterwards always feel like she has better taste than I give her credit for but it still kind of tends to be turn off for me. I completely admit that in my case it's partially snobbishness, and a desire not to follow the crowd.
As far as Tolstoy and stuff, I wonder how many of her readers actually completed that given what they were accustomed to from her other selections - my mom still has it somewhere but never read it (English is also my mom's second language and I don't think reading a translation of Russian literature in a language other than your own would necessarily be that fun). However, I was actually happy when she picked East of Eden - I love that novel, and think it was much better than Grapes of Wrath so I enjoyed seeing that novel get some attention for once when it came to Steinbeck.

Posted by: Jen at November 24, 2009 2:27 PM

This is the first of Marquez's books that I've read. I think its OK. The story was simply too floaty and bizarre in places and I found that I didn't really care about a lot of the characters. I see what you mean that everyone having the same name works, but I don't think it did. Coupled with the hazy time and space, it made it too difficult to really get attached to any one character.

Most of the Buendias are grasping for some kind of happiness or peace and very few achieve it. Some things felt thrown in there just for the sake of fantasy (the beautiful girl floating up in the sky, or Aureliano's sons getting gunned down for an imaginary mark on their foreheads) etc.

As for the Oprah sticker, I can see the turnoff, but it doesn't bother me. There's a lot of stuff she recommends that I could care less about.

Posted by: Brie at November 24, 2009 3:28 PM

Wait, did no one else learn about banana republics?

That aside, man, I got about two thirds through this book before I realized what the title of the book meant, and it crushed me. I like how each and every generation is more and more isolated and withdrawn. Also, I loved Remedios the Beauty! She was the autistic pica eater! (at least, I think she was the pica eater) My favorite scene was when her mother matter-of-factly watched Remedios being carried directly to heaven on a gust of wind. Sigh.

So pretty, so sad.

Posted by: noah at November 24, 2009 9:38 PM

You have to get over your desire for attachment to character as soon as possible. There is no way to get attached to a character or characters in this book. That's the entire point. It's the family, the community, etc... everything changes, everything remains the same. The government is always corrupt, bureaucratic, and violent. The heat of the summers, the rain, the decay, the jungle, and so on, are all characters as much as any person is.

This is maybe my favourite book. I will admit to a feeling of some superiority, in that I think people that don't get it simply can't get over their reliance on the standard storytelling form. Then I remember that I can't get into Marcel Proust.

Posted by: Brenton at November 24, 2009 9:52 PM

Bored me. Stopped reading after the fiftieth person had the same name and still got a B+ on the module. Also, always thought ants ate the baby.

Posted by: arrrghzi at November 24, 2009 11:42 PM

If you go back and reread a book, does that count toward the 100?

Posted by: Odnon at November 25, 2009 12:05 AM

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOVE this book.

The club has been around for years now, I just don't get why people get so angry about reading a book that someone else read first.

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOVE this book.

There's a murder on the first page, what's static about that? But, I have only met one other person who has read the book and actually enjoyed it, so it seems like it's not for MOST people. But damn, if I don't love the shit out of this book. I think it's Bill Clinton's favourite book--probably because it's so *charged*.

Wasn't it Rebeca who was the pica eater, carrying around her parents bones and eating whitewash? She had problems. (100 Problems of Solitude, and a gun ain't one. Sorry.)

Posted by: Jo 'Mama' Besser at November 25, 2009 6:39 PM





Post a comment

 (required)

 (required)


Preview of your comment:



Video ads popping up after each page view? Try clearing your browser's cookies.