I haven’t gotten as far as I would’ve liked in the book before writing this entry, but here goes.
I went back and read some of the previous entries written on this novel, and Todd’s comment about the how the film adaptation ended up being frustrating was interesting in that I think part of the film’s disjointedness (granted I haven’t seen it) may have resulted from the fact that a lot of the actions in this book go unexplained (for example, Teresa’s dislike from Quim [first seen in the beginning of Chapter VI] seems to come out of nowhere. I might’ve expected, for instance, for Rodoreda to have Valladura to ask Teresa why she doesn’t like Quim, in order for the reader to get an explanation). But since this constantly happens throughout the book – almost to the point where it’s part of the aesthetic, I’m thinking it’s part of whatever Rodoreda is trying to communicate (which I’ll have to read more to figure out). As a result though, it feels like we’re not getting much psychological depth to any of the characters. Teresa, the character we’ve spent most time with until now is scheming and full of secrets, so it seems like we can never get a full handle on her anyway.
On a related note: in conversations, the characters often seem to miss each other’s points or intentions, either unconsciously of deliberately. None of the relationships in this book seem fully open in that they’re all mediated in some ways by lies/withholding of truths. Any thoughts on why this might be?
Spain’s greatest art museum gets a new director
22 hours ago