December Book Study - One Hundred Years of Solitude

Fenika · Dec 2, 2009

Hello, and welcome to the F/SF Book Study.

This thread is for discussion of One Hundred Years of Solitude by Gabriel García Márquez.

***Spoilers*** will be streaking through this thread unpredictably. You have been warned.

If anyone wants to compare to previous book studies:

2008:
Ender's Game (August)
Lies of Locke Lamora (September)
A Deepness in the Sky (October)
A Fire in the Deep (November)
Storm Front (December)

2009:
I Am Legend (January)
The Onion Girl (February)
Lord of Light (March)
Small Gods (April)
Beggars in Spain (May)
The Once and Future King (June)
Foundation (July)
The Graveyard Book (August)
Neuromancer (September)
The Last Wish (October)
The Knife of Never Letting Go (November)

Thank you to Broken Fingers for starting the book study!

-----------
Here is the list, compiled by Fingers, of possible discussion topics. Feel free to tackle something off the list or come up with your own points.
-----------
First of all: Did you enjoy the book? Why or why not?
What was your impression of it?
And I’ll list some of the possible things we can discuss:
The Beginning:
- How effective was the opening hook?
- How effective was the first sentence? The first paragraph? The first page? The first chapter?
- When were you pulled into the author’s world? By the end of the first chapter?
- If not, when?
- How do you think this was accomplished? Or why do you think it wasn’t accomplished?
- What would you have done to change it/make it better?
- If you were an editor, what would your reaction be to the first chapter?
- Why do you think the average reader liked it so much?
And more…
The Protagonist:
- What did you like/dislike about the protagonist?
- How did the author introduce the protagonist?
- How did the author get you to become invested in the protagonist?
- What was different about the protagonist as opposed to other protagonists? What was the same? Did the author make the protag distinguishable? If so, how?
- What techniques did the author use to show the protagonist throughout the story?
- What were some of the characteristics the author gave the character and how did they work/not work?
The Characters:
- Did the author make the characters come alive for you?
- How did he/she do this?
- How were they described?
- How were they distinctive?
And more…
The Setting:
- Was the author’s world convincing?
- Did he/she make you feel you were there? How?
- What about the setting did you like? Not like?
- What would you have done differently?
And more….
The Plot/Story:
- Did you enjoy it? Why or why not?
- Was it different or similar to other plotlines in the genre? How?
- Was it believable? Predictable?
- Were there any twists, turns or surprises?
- Would you have thought of it? How does it compare to your own plotline of your WIP?
- Did it pull you through or did you have to wade through it?
- How was this done or how do you think it should’ve been done?
- If you were buying stories for a publisher, and this manuscript hit your desk (not knowing what you do now about its sales) would you have bought it or expected it to be successful?
- Why do you think the buying public enjoyed it so much?
- What variations, if any, would you have added to the storyline/plot?
And more…
The Style:
- What did you think of the author’s style of writing? Like it? Hate it?
- How much do you think this had to do with the success of the book, if any?
- What type of POV was used? How effective was it? Would the book have turned out different if the POV were done differently?
- How removed was the author from the story or how intrusive?
And more…
The Structure:
- How did the author unfold the story?
- Were the beginning, middle and end equally strong?
- How effective was the way the author gave you all the information?
Was it straightforward? Suspenseful? Predictable? Surprising?
- Could it have been done another way?
- Was it a linear structure or did the scenes jump around? How did this add/detract from the story or your enjoyment of it?
And more…..
The Theme:
- Was there any? What was it?
- Did you think it had an impact on your enjoyment of the story?
- Was it blatant or subtle?
- Do you think the average reader registered this?
- Do you think it may have affected him/her or contributed in any way to the success of the book?
And more…
Conflict:
- What was the main conflict?
- How was it handled?
- Was it a large part of the story or did the author keep it lying under the surface?
- What other conflicts did the author use in the story and when? (Internal and external.)
- What purpose did they serve?
- Would the story have been as enjoyable with less conflict? More?
- What types of conflict could’ve added to the story? Which conflicts subtracted from the story?
And more…
Dialogue:
- Was it realistic?
- Was it readable?
- How did the author handle ‘tags’?
- Was there a lot of dialogue or a little?
- Were there dialects? Slang? Profanity? Vulgarity?
And more…
The Ending:
- Was it satisfying? Why or why not?
- Did it come as a surprise or did you see it coming from page two?
- Would you have ended it the same?
- Was everything resolved?
- Would you be able to write a sequel?
- Would you buy another book from this author?
And more….
_____________

Fenika · Dec 2, 2009

To get us started, I want to say I'm almost done and I've mostly enjoyed this book. There was a lull somewhere around the middle that almost had me putting it aside, but it's been an interesting novel all in all.

My biggest gripe is that while there are excellent details and moments of character depth that are intriguing, I think for most of the book he doesn't go deep enough with the scenes and characters. Sometimes I feel like I'm just bouncing between ideas, or that something amazing isn't explored enough (like the massacre in the square and the cover up).

ELMontague · Dec 2, 2009

I'm better than half way, but not almost finished. I think it's an excellent book. Though I am mystified what makes this science fiction or fantasy. I've heard stories like this all my life, told by the old men and women. I suppose folk lore is fantasy, but it's more like a shared memory.

eyeblink · Dec 2, 2009

It's worth noting that even hugely influential Great Works of World Literature, from writers who went on to win the Nobel Prize, are not above having hooky opening sentences...

I take Fenika's point about characters, but I read it that Macondo, the place, was the main character. The people in it - while convincing enough - are seen from "outside" in the main. Like Dickens's characters, they're flat rather than round but the writer makes them vibrate enough to bring them to life. Also, it's a saga storyline, in that the people we begin with die off around halfway through and their descendants take over, so no one person really dominates.

As for being fantasy, it's no doubt a cultural thing, but I was never raised with stories involving young girls floating off into the sky and never coming back, ambulatory drops of blood and incest children being born with pig tails. (I used to know a Greek woman who wrote some striking magic realism based in her own culture, and she said that she was drawing on stories, symbols and imagery that she grew up with. So maybe that's my Anglo heritage speaking here.)

I read this novel eleven years ago - holiday reading in the very un-Latin environment of Shetland. It is a little heavy in places, but it rewarded sticking with it.

ELMontague · Dec 2, 2009

I read the pigs tail and the ascension like Granddad pulling my leg. It's all true, but a little more fantastic when it came out of his mouth. I'm a regular old Texas boy. My father was a minister, my mother a school teacher. We don't really have stories that all that grand, but hey it still felt that way to me.

maxmordon · Dec 5, 2009

ELMontague said:
I read the pigs tail and the ascension like Granddad pulling my leg. It's all true, but a little more fantastic when it came out of his mouth. I'm a regular old Texas boy. My father was a minister, my mother a school teacher. We don't really have stories that all that grand, but hey it still felt that way to me.

García Márquez has commented that is pretty much based on those old tales his grandparents used to tell them and what he heard from the people of his hometown, the character of Colonel Buendia is based on his grandfather and appears to also based other characters like the unnamed colonel in No One Writes The Colonel.

I have always felt that part of the story of the book was about endurance. I once read a paper comparing it with the United States folk and history, it's a history of man winning against elements, pilgrims surviving winter, cowboys and pioneers going to the west and managing to control elements and control their life and reality while the Latin American culture is the opposite, it's pretty much man trying to survive elements outside his control and just sitting around trying to stay afloat and knowing with resignation that he cannot do anything to change the things around him.

Another element is the repetition, which is quite visible with the Aurelianos and the Arcadios. All the Arcadios are outgoing and joyful men who fall in disgrace by not managing to dominate their own impulses while all Aurelianos are shy and a bit abstent-minded, just fading away and never finding joy.

K_Woods · Dec 11, 2009

I've just finished the third chapter, and I'm really pressed for a compelling reason to go any farther -- I've made it this far by sheer stubbornness. I'm not sure why it's failing to hook me in any way, but I have a few guesses -- and one of them is that distant third person omniscient does not agree with me. At all.

Has anyone read this in its original language? Does the translation reflect the spirit and language of the original text, if anyone has read both?

ELMontague · Dec 11, 2009

It's very literary, something my mother would read. Good, but not me. I finished it a couple of days ago.

maxmordon · Dec 11, 2009

I have only read it in Spanish and this man adores his third person omniscient, let me tell you, but it has some sort of old folks gossip or bedtime story feeling (or at least had it for me) when I read it.

It's worst on The General in His Larybrith and downright confusing in The Autumn of the Patriarch (where he changes the subject of the sentence in middle of the sentence)

archerjoe · Dec 12, 2009

Fenika said:
<...>

My biggest gripe is that while there are excellent details and moments of character depth that are intriguing, I think for most of the book he doesn't go deep enough with the scenes and characters. Sometimes I feel like I'm just bouncing between ideas, or that something amazing isn't explored enough (like the massacre in the square and the cover up).

Sums up my experience with this book quite well. There is an amazing number of ideas and scenes but they're relatively quick sketches and then off to something else.

Fenika · Dec 12, 2009

KW- if you're not mystically compelled to turn the page despite the lack of hook, it's more of the same for the rest of the novel I'm sad to say.

But, I finished last night and I found the end interesting. Some story lines came full circle or to a conclusion, including that of Macondo as a whole.

It was an interesting read, but I don't know that I could tackle a whole novel that was similar to that again.

And for sex being such a major theme, why did all the sexual relationships have to be so odd? And what was I supposed to take away from all that? Maybe it was just an extension of the strangeness of other relationships? (but there were some non-sexual relationships that were far from odd...)

ELMontague · Dec 12, 2009

I actually enjoyed the characters and all their eccentricities. It gave me the feeling of my grandfather's stories, they were very Big Fish.

maxmordon · Dec 12, 2009

Fenika said:
KW- if you're not mystically compelled to turn the page despite the lack of hook, it's more of the same for the rest of the novel I'm sad to say.

But, I finished last night and I found the end interesting. Some story lines came full circle or to a conclusion, including that of Macondo as a whole.

It was an interesting read, but I don't know that I could tackle a whole novel that was similar to that again.

And for sex being such a major theme, why did all the sexual relationships have to be so odd? And what was I supposed to take away from all that? Maybe it was just an extension of the strangeness of other relationships? (but there were some non-sexual relationships that were far from odd...)

This is just a wild guess, but since no one in Macondo are costumed to social conventions except for commendadors, priests, travellers, etc.(when cinema arrive, they feel sad and disappointed to see how is all a lie) They really don't know how to express their feelings properly nor understand them outside their status on life (being an army colonel, being the mother who balances it all, etc.)

Fenika · Dec 12, 2009

Oh, good point, Max.

K_Woods · Dec 13, 2009

Fenika said:
KW- if you're not mystically compelled to turn the page despite the lack of hook, it's more of the same for the rest of the novel I'm sad to say.

Crud. Are we obligated to finish what we start for book studies?

ELMontague · Dec 13, 2009

I would say if you can't finish the book because it doesn't work for you, that's a valid criticism and your done. I, on the other hand, am a glutton for punishment and I read everything I start, eventually. Though I'm still only about three hundred pages into Norell and Strange. It's a doorstop in my opinion, but I'll finish it eventuallly.

Me&BacchusGoIntoABar · Dec 14, 2009

ELMontague said:
I would say if you can't finish the book because it doesn't work for you, that's a valid criticism and your done. I, on the other hand, am a glutton for punishment and I read everything I start, eventually. Though I'm still only about three hundred pages into Norell and Strange. It's a doorstop in my opinion, but I'll finish it eventuallly.

Wow, really? Why and how do you do that? You and I are on opposite ends of this spectrum LOL. I rarely finish books all the way through. Not that many grab me enough to do that.

maxmordon · Dec 14, 2009

I almost always finish the books I start reading sooner or later, but if I start to read the book and I don't feel like I want to go on with it, I then put it aside since is not fair for me nor for the book and I wait when I feel like it.

K_Woods · Dec 14, 2009

maxmordon said:
I almost always finish the books I start reading sooner or later, but if I start to read the book and I don't feel like I want to go on with it, I then put it aside since is not fair for me nor for the book and I wait when I feel like it.

Exactly.

If I try to continue plowing through a book that just isn't grabbing me, that indifference starts turning into resentment. Sometimes that resentment turns into full-blown rage. And that is not a happy place to be -- and (usually) is unfair to the author.

Question for you, Max -- is Garcia-Marquez a dry stylist in Spanish, or is that a likely artifact of the translation? We're not quite talking sawdust-levels, but it's fairly dry prose.

maxmordon · Dec 14, 2009

K_Woods said:
Exactly.

Question for you, Max -- is Garcia-Marquez a dry stylist in Spanish, or is that a likely artifact of the translation? We're not quite talking sawdust-levels, but it's fairly dry prose.

Could you expand this a bit, K.? I am not really comprehending what you mean with dry prose.

K_Woods · Dec 14, 2009

Hmm. Let's see...staid, starched, sometimes lifeless, sometimes appropriate, the sort of thing you would expect with dry humor. I'm kind of scratching my head here looking for an easy definition...the best example/comparison I can think of in English is Garrison Keillor, but he's a humorist and the dryness is part of his humor.

I don't think I'm doing a very good job of this...it's almost a tangible quality.

ETA: Thanks to a (non-AW) friend, who suggested describing it as telling it like it is, or free of emotion. Now why didn't I think of that...

maxmordon · Dec 15, 2009

K_Woods said:
Hmm. Let's see...staid, starched, sometimes lifeless, sometimes appropriate, the sort of thing you would expect with dry humor. I'm kind of scratching my head here looking for an easy definition...the best example/comparison I can think of in English is Garrison Keillor, but he's a humorist and the dryness is part of his humor.

I don't think I'm doing a very good job of this...it's almost a tangible quality.

ETA: Thanks to a (non-AW) friend, who suggested describing it as telling it like it is, or free of emotion. Now why didn't I think of that...

The exact opposite of how I perceive him in Spanish where his work feels so passionate and lively, I remember seeing once a video where he read the intro of one of his novels and it was almost like a brimstone and fire preacher reading the apocalypse (or Bela Lugosi at the beginning of Glen or Glenda) something a bit too literary, almost theatrical like a tall tale half forgotten from a time and place that no longer exist as Elf pointed out.

December Book Study - One Hundred Years of Solitude

Fenika

Fenika

ELMontague

eyeblink

Barbara says hi

ELMontague

maxmordon

Penúltimo

K_Woods

9 of 10 Overlords prefer Evil Pie!

ELMontague

maxmordon

Penúltimo

archerjoe

Fenika

ELMontague

maxmordon

Penúltimo

Fenika

K_Woods

9 of 10 Overlords prefer Evil Pie!

ELMontague

Me&BacchusGoIntoABar

maxmordon

Penúltimo

K_Woods

9 of 10 Overlords prefer Evil Pie!

maxmordon

Penúltimo

K_Woods

9 of 10 Overlords prefer Evil Pie!

maxmordon

Penúltimo