Sunday, March 8, 2015

Formula: The Smallest Woman in the World

“It is the function of the artist to evoke the experience of surprised recognition: to show the viewer what he knows but does not know that he knows.” – William Burroughs

Status Quo: Traditional stories affirm our beliefs and predispositions; they don’t question our cultural context.

Trouble: Lispector writes about very traditionally explored situations, yet she heightens, distorts, exaggerates, and defamiliarizes the familiar; makes the everyday strange.

Question: Why does she do this? How does she do this? What is the point; how does it benefit what the reader gets out of the story? (I’m not sure if these are too many questions, but it seems like they all kind of connect.)

Claim: This is a story by a female author who is highly aware that narrative constructs and defines a subject; that the story itself is completely influenced by the way (or how) it’s constructed, which in turn effects the reader’s experience. Lispector creates exaggerated characters, an unusual plotline, and a twisted, meta exploration of themes by using her story to play with these ideas of narrative and perspective. By defamiliarizing the familiar, heightening the strange*, and exaggerating/distorting the circumstances and situations within her story, she allows her readers to gain a riveting understanding of the distance between the scientist/explorer and the native. Her astute awareness of her narrative style is what remarkably brings to light the idea of the Western, white mode of dealing with indigenous people.



*-heightening something by making it strange? Not sure how to phrase this yet.

No comments:

Post a Comment