The Rory Gilmore Book Club discussion
Rory Book Discussions
>
The Shadow of the Wind
message 1:
by
Dini, the master of meaning
(new)
Nov 01, 2009 07:37PM
Mod
reply
|
flag
I read this book a year ago, and I thought it was beautiful. I think I have given my copy of The Shadow of the Wind to a friend, so I can't look up my favorite parts. I thought the characters, good or evil, were amazing. I have his new book on my Kindle, but I haven't read it yet.
I just finished this book recently. I would say it's a wonderful combination of many elements: a detective story, actions, revenge, love and friendship. Many twists and turns in the plot. It gives surprises even when it already comes to the last 50 pages.P.S. I saw in Goodreads that the Cemtery of Forgotten Books appear again in the author's new book too!
Okay, so I'm not a big fan of this novel (seems to me that I might be the only one). But...I must give the author credit where credit is due. I thought he depicted Barcelona most beautifully (much as Woody Allen did in Vicky Cristina Barcelona). Also, the post-civil war Franco regime timesetting, nicely done. But he lost me somehow when the story focused on Daniels relationship with the blind girl. Maybe I should give it another try, but not this month.
I was told it was okay to read the second book, The Angel's Game, before this. And while you don't need to read this one before TAG, I think you'll appreciate the whole theme better if you read in them in order.That said, I loathed TAG. As much as I admire the author's writing for some situations, the whole structure of the story was weak and disinteresting. So it was a great relief to me that starting this book, I found the writing to be completely different and a 100x more interesting.
I do know that people who read this book first, did enjoy TAG. So my reaction, I believe, is in the minority.
Kristel wrote: "Okay, so I'm not a big fan of this novel (seems to me that I might be the only one). But...I must give the author credit where credit is due. I thought he depicted Barcelona most beautifully (much ..."I've been to Barcelona twice and it was so much fun to picture some of the places he wrote about. And while it's obviously changed a lot since the early 1900s, it's still a city of great beauty.
(And I loved Vicky Cristina Barcelona for the same reason!)
Barcelona has been on my list of cities to visit for ages now. Had to cancel a trip last year because of my pregnancy. Just about everyone I know that has been there simply adores the city. So I'm hoping to visit in 2010. Vicky Cristina Barcelona is just another reason for me for visiting the city, and Zafons novel is a nice bonus.
Mod
Dini wrote: "Does anyone else's copy of the book have the tour of the locations in Barcelona at the back? It's pretty cool."I have this on kindle, so I'm going to say no (but I'm not sure yet). That sounds very cool though.
Kristel wrote: "Barcelona has been on my list of cities to visit for ages now. Had to cancel a trip last year because of my pregnancy. Just about everyone I know that has been there simply adores the city. So I'm ..."I hope you get there. There is something magical when you're walking along the Ramblas and it's all quaint and old and yet somehow modern and then out of nowhere is this ice cream Guadi fairytale castle that just shimmers in the midst of this urban setting. It's a storybook that comes to life.
I just finished the book... I have pretty mixed feelings about it. I'm not even sure how to describe my thoughts. And I'm not sure, is it okay to already discuss plot points here? It's the sort of book you wouldn't want to get spoilers for, so can I already assume that anyone who reads this topic has read the book?On a general note... The writing is often very good and enjoyable, and there was a lot that was fascinating about this book, but somehow it didn't all come together for me very well. I felt like the solution to the mysteries dragged on too long, and at the same time the author seemed to feel compelled to add really gross and dark violence, more the further along we got in the book. As a result the last 100-150 pages were really difficult for me to get through, though those should be the most fascinating part of such a book which you'd swallow up in one go. In the early part of the book I was really into it and liked it lots, but towards the end I didn't like it so much anymore. I guess my tolerance for depressive and gorey stuff was reached, and there was just some level of emotional meaningfulness that was missing for me. I know lots of people have loved this book, but somehow it didn't work as well for me as I hoped at first.
Katri wrote: "I just finished the book... I have pretty mixed feelings about it. I'm not even sure how to describe my thoughts. And I'm not sure, is it okay to already discuss plot points here? It's the sort of ..."I think you summed up Zafon's writing style. heh
I would then suggest you NOT read The Angel's Game. From what I've heard from people who really enjoyed TSOTW, it was much weaker.
Mod
Katri, you actually sum up quite well why I got bored with the book and couldn't get past the first 150 pages. I liked the first chapters a lot, but then...it didn't come together for me at all. Zafon got lost...or I got lost...and I felt disappointed in the book. It's like he got my hopes up high in reading a really truly compelling fascinating story and then he basically let me down. And this is kind of strange. I'm now adding posts about this book, while I mentioned not willing to read it when it was picked as this months selection. So it somehow did something to me. I'm not indifferent about this novel. When I find a book boring and tedious, this usually means that I'm not interested anymore.
Kristel wrote: "Katri, you actually sum up quite well why I got bored with the book and couldn't get past the first 150 pages. I liked the first chapters a lot, but then...it didn't come together for me at all. Za..."Zafon's writing has a way of sucking you into his fairytale wardrobe, but once you're there, you realize all that's there is an endless snowy wood (no nymphs. no wicked ice queen. no hot cocoa.). And then you're lost and don't know how to get back to the wardrobe which makes you cranky and tired. Yet you know you're still in a magical land, so you're compelled to keep thinking about it.
Meghan wrote: "Zafon's writing has a way of sucking you into his fairytale wardrobe, but once you're there, you realize all that's there is an endless snowy wood (no nymphs. no wicked ice queen. no hot cocoa.). And then you're lost and don't know how to get back to the wardrobe which makes you cranky and tired. Yet you know you're still in a magical land, so you're compelled to keep thinking about it."That's a pretty awesome description of it. How right you are.
I also didn't feel indifferent to the book, it's the sort of book that stays in your mind, but I feel somehow let down by it. And like it sucked me in by fascinating writing but then sneaked in something which makes me feel... not right, somehow.
I'll copy and paste the review I wrote on Goodreads, because it gives more details about what I thought and I might as well put it here instead of thinking other ways of saying the same things. It's not spoilery, really, but it's possible that if people start discussing some points in detail there will eventually be spoilers in the discussion.
This is what I wrote (and I realise I have no idea if I spelled the names correctly, should check...):
I have really mixed feelings about this book. It started out promisingly, as a kind of a Gothic mystery set in 1930s-1950s Barcelona and revolving around books and the mysterious fate of a writer called Julián Carax, which the protagonist Dániel tries to discover. Zafón's writing is elegant and beautiful and quite an enjoyable experience to read. Though sometimes the style seems to become a purpose in itself and is too much, too rich to be digested, and I failed to notice much of a difference in the voices of different characters.
For quite a while I was really into reading this book, but towards the end it really seemed to water down and finishing it became a chore rather than a pleasure. For one thing, there's only so much gory violence, doom and gloom, depressive depictions of human nature that I can take without starting to feel physically ill and wonder why I'm spending my free time reading this book instead of something that's actually, you know, enjoyable. This book exceeded my comfort limits many times in the last 100-200 pages (also in some instances earlier, but there in small enough doses that I could recover from one before meeting the next). Also, I felt the story and the solution of the mystery dragged on way too long and the solutions weren't executed as well as I'd have liked. I especially disliked the long, convoluted letter near the end of the book, which solves many of the question marks in the story but not in a way that would make the dramatic suspense work too well, and is written far too unbelievably for a letter - the writer of the letter could never have known everything she describes. I would much rather have seen the mystery resolve itself through action and people talking, not that letter which almost killed my ability to finish the book. By the time I finished the letter I was so exhausted that I could scarcely bother about the remaining resolution chapters, though the story actually picked up again there.
My favourite thing was probably the way Zafón described his setting - I have no idea whether this gave me an accurate image of Barcelona in those decades, but I definitely was left with a strong image of the places where the story was taking place. Generally there was a wonderful richness of detail, though like the beauty of the writing, this also got a bit too much, leaving me with the feeling of eating too much of too rich dessert. There were also some quite interesting characters, whom I much enjoyed reading about, though I confess I found the protagonist pretty annoying a lot of the time and also ended up liking Julián far less than I liked him in the early part of the story. I'm also not too happy with the treatment of female characters, they were all quite flat and the only one I found potentially interesting, the author treated with contempt.
I seem to focus on the negatives a lot, but I'm just trying to figure out why I didn't love the book as much as many people seemed to. It was definitely an interesting reading experience and will not be easily forgotten, and I can see how other people with somewhat different tastes (and more tolerance for gloom and gore) would find it fascinating. But I couldn't love the book or find it emotionally very meaningful, and I wasn't left with a great desire to read Zafón's other books.
I agree with you on the long letter part. It does get a bit tedious and slow, like the story is going on forever. But what I like about this book is that the resolution of the mysteries is really unexpected. It overturns all my previous assumptions.
And my brother said that he found it all too predictable. :P I'm somewhere in between. I was definitely surprised by the big revelations, but maybe not quite as surprised as I would have liked to be. Or maybe by then I was just so jaded by the story I didn't give a damn about the characters involved, and so it didn't move me as much as I'd have liked.
Meghan wrote: "Zafon's writing has a way of sucking you into his fairytale wardrobe, but once you're there, you realize all that's there is an endless snowy wood (no nymphs. no wicked ice queen. no hot cocoa.). And then you're lost and don't know how to get back to the wardrobe which makes you cranky and tired. Yet you know you're still in a magical land, so you're compelled to keep thinking about it."Well said! You captured my thoughts on the book exactly!
Dini wrote: "Does anyone else's copy of the book have the tour of the locations in Barcelona at the back? It's pretty cool."I think my has it. I read this quite a while ago, but I remember thinking it would be cool to use the guide.
I'm just on page 114 but already have found it hard to keep my interest. While I'm reading it I seem to be enjoying it okay - not completely enthralled in it as I enjoy in so many other books, but not completely turned off by it either. It's wanting to pick it up again that has me struggling. To be fair I just returned from a week-long vacation and I'm struggling all around to pick things up again as I transition from Vacation Mode to Real Life Mode.I like a lot of the concepts proposed in the story, but can't help feeling a little 'bleh' about the execution so far. I'm hoping it picks up soon.
My copy (trade paperback) does not have a tour of Barcelona locations. That would have been interesting.
El wrote: "I like a lot of the concepts proposed in the story, but can't help feeling a little 'bleh' about the execution so far...."That's my feeling summed up more eloquently!
El wrote: "I'm just on page 114 but already have found it hard to keep my interest. While I'm reading it I seem to be enjoying it okay - not completely enthralled in it as I enjoy in so many other books, but..."I have had the complete opposite reaction: from pretty much the first page, I have been addicted to the book, completely enthralled. I'm curious, what don't you like about it? The plot or the characters? Or the writing itself? I find it all very good, and very Dickensian. Then again, maybe you don't like Dickens.
Does anyone else see a similarity between the plotting and characterization of Zafon and Dickens?
Dini wrote: "Anybody started The Shadow of the Wind yet? I started it yesterday and have already underlined three passages in the first part alone. My favorite (don't have the book with me now so I'..."I love books written explicitly for lovers of literature. It seems so obvious, but when done well it results in the most endearing reads.
Jenny wrote: "I have had the complete opposite reaction: from pretty much the first page, I have been addicted to the book, completely enthralled. I'm curious, what don't you like about it? The plot or the characters? Or the writing itself? I find it all very good, and very Dickensian. Then again, maybe you don't like Dickens.Does anyone else see a similarity between the plotting and characterization of Zafon and Dickens?"
I don't feel the same way about it that I do about Dickens at all, but that's my opinion. I have always been able to find a connection with the characters of Dickens, whereas in The Shadow of the Wind I do not find myself making any of the same sort of connection.
In a lot of ways I feel like I'm reading a completely different book from the one everyone else appears to be reading. I don't find the descriptions of Barcelona all that fascinating at this point (page 273), I don't find the characters all that developed... yet. Perhaps that will change eventually, but I'm talking of my opinion thus far. Like I said a few posts ago I love the concept behind the story, but feel the storytelling could be so much better.
Jenny wrote: "El wrote: "I'm just on page 114 but already have found it hard to keep my interest. While I'm reading it I seem to be enjoying it okay - not completely enthralled in it as I enjoy in so many other..."Well, I haven't finished this one, so I can't say my comments really apply to this story on the whole. I did read The Angel's Game and they do apply to that one. I really enjoyed Zafon's ability to describe the world you're in--as I've been to Barcelona, it often felt like I was standing back on those streets again. And he turns a witty phrase, which is why you have such hope for the book. He does write like a person who loves books. But it's almost as he loves them so well he's trying to shove as many writing styles and as many genres into one book as he possibly can so that he can pay homage to all of them. And because he's not that skilled a writer, he doesn't pull it off, so the story becomes convoluted and messy. He starts you down one alley and then you find the next chapter takes you down another. And he does this so often that you finaly realize they're all dead ends.
But then again, other than A Christmas Carol, I'm not a fan of Dickens.
Jenny wrote: "El wrote: "I'm just on page 114 but already have found it hard to keep my interest. While I'm reading it I seem to be enjoying it okay - not completely enthralled in it as I enjoy in so many other..."But I do know a lot people who really enjoyed this book as you do. Unfortunately for you, it seems only the dissenters are the ones posting here these days.
Meghan wrote: "But I do know a lot people who really enjoyed this book as you do. Unfortunately for you, it seems only the dissenters are the ones posting here these days."I think this must be what the moderators are talking about in regards to changing the format. (Not the dissenters posting only, but the lack of discussion of books.)
I'm about 130 pages now from the end, and there have been a few spots that have picked up for me. It's just strange for me to read a book in a few days that actually feels longer than that. I do still plan to check out The Angel's Game though. I'm not so turned off by Shadow that I would discount the author entirely. By the time I generally get around to reading a book that everyone has been raving about, I wind up not as excited about it once I read it. Too high expectations perhaps? The same thing happened with I Capture the Castle.
I must have enjoyed the book, because I gave it a 4--high praise from me. That being said, I don't remember much. I think it was because he did a good job of taking me to another place and helping me escape. There was also suspense and some sense of resolution at the end. I don't recall so much genre-switching like in TAG
If people who love the book want more positive discussion on the book, then it's up to the people who love the book to discuss it more. It's only natural that those who didn't love the book (who probably have experienced lots of people around them praising it to no end and saying it's magnificent) will gladly talk about their experience and criticise it when they find other like-minded individuals. Actually, I'd love it if there was a bit more detailed discussion on both sides on why people loved or didn't love it.My problems with the book in concise format:
- I found the resolution of the mystery poorly executed
- I didn't like the characters - this is always a big deal for me, because if I don't relate to the characters and feel for them, I don't care about what happens to them
- the mood was too gloomy and depressive for me and the book was too crammed with gruesome violence. I know this is not a problem for everyone, but I just happen not to be able to stomach much of that.
- while the writing style was often beautiful, it was just too much, and I also had a feeling that the writer was like showing off "Look! I can write beautifully and come up with interesting metaphors!"... it's like the style became too much of a focus instead of building a storyline that could live up to the expectations it raised in the beginning
What I did like:
- the writing style up to a point, until it became too much
- the Barcelona descriptions, and the choice of setting in general
- some of the characters, especially Fermín, even if he was a cliched type he was very enjoyable to read about
I can see why some people would love the book. It's just not quite my thing.
I enjoy discussions that move beyond the enjoyment of a book or lack thereof. I can think of some books I didn't like all that much but then loved discussing some of the issues they addressed. What issues do you think this author was trying to raise in SOTW? What do you think his worldview is? What was motivating the different characters? What did you like most/least about some of the characters? If you didn't care about any of them, what might have made you care more? What was the library of lost books symbolizing? How or why is the old house important to the story--or isn't it?
STOLEN DISCUSSION QUESTIONS--POSSIBLE SPOILERS1. Julián Carax's and Daniel's lives follow very similar trajectories. Yet one ends in tragedy, the other in happiness. What similarities are there between the paths they take? What are the differences that allow Daniel to avoid tragedy?
2. Nuria Monfort tells Daniel, "Julián once wrote that coincidences are the scars of fate. There are no coincidences, Daniel. We are the puppets of our unconscious." What does that mean? What does she refer to in her own experience and in Julián's life?
3. Nuria Monfort's dying words, meant for Julián, are, "There are worse prisons than words." What does she mean by this? What is she referring to?
4. There are many devil figures in the story --- Carax's Laín Coubert, Jacinta's Zacarias, Fermín's Fumero. How does evil manifest itself in each devil figure? What are the characteristics of the villains/devils?
5. Discuss the title of the novel. What is "The Shadow of the Wind"? Where does Zafón refer to it and what does he use the image to illustrate?
6. Zafón's female characters are often enigmatic, otherworldly angels full of power and mystery. Clara the blind white goddess ultimately becomes a fallen angel; Carax credits sweet Bea with saving his and Daniel's lives; Daniel's mother is actually an angel whose death renders her so ephemeral that Daniel can't even remember her face. Do you think Zafón paints his female characters differently than his male characters? What do the women represent in Daniel's life? What might the Freud loving Miquel Moliner say about Daniel's relationships with women?
7. Daniel says of The Shadow of the Wind, "As it unfolded, the structure of the story began to remind me of one of those Russian dolls that contain innumerable ever-smaller dolls within" (p. 7). Zafón's The Shadow of the Wind unfolds much the same way, with many characters contributing fragments of their own stories in the first person point of view. What does Zafón illustrate with this method of storytelling? What do the individual mini-autobiographies contribute to the tale?
8. The evil Fumero is the only son of a ridiculed father and a superficial, status-seeking mother. The troubled Julián is the bastard son of a love-starved musical mother and an amorous, amoral businessman, though he was raised by a cuckolded hatmaker. Do you think their personalities are products of nature or nurture? How are the sins of the fathers and mothers visited upon each of the characters?
Here's a link that contains an interview with the author:
http://us.penguingroup.com/static/rgu...
Hello,I've read this book about a year ago, really good one, i've just finished the prequal book, not sure if it is translated in English yet. I've read it in Dutch.
Also really good. I want to read more off his books but sadly not all are translated and my spanish isn't that good.
Wendy
Well, I don't know that I will be able to discuss the book without discussing how I liked it and whether I enjoyed it or not, but I will try to discuss some of those questions to speak about the book in more detail. SPOILERS AHEAD!Point 6, female characters. This was one of the things I criticised. I found most of them very flat and variations of the same. The only one I liked was Clara; she had personality and I thought she could have been an interesting character. I disliked the way the author had her "fall from grace" and treated her with such contempt. What was her crime? That she had sex with a man? Where as it's totally okay that Beatrix had sex with a boy she wasn't married to while engaged to another? Of course, because he was the protagonist and so the good woman will fall in love with him while the bad woman will not... (I'm not saying that Beatrix was somehow wrong to do it, I just protest it being okay for her but not for Clara.) I really was disappointed with Clara's treatment, I thought there was so much potential in her and then she was dropped almost completely after Dániel discovers her in bed with her piano teacher. I don't really know what her point in the story was, as such. Does anybody have ideas?
Beatrix seemed at first like she'd have potential, but it all watered down very quickly when she became the love interest. I really expected and hoped her to be spunkier and more interesting than she was. Penélope was so ephemereal and generally beautiful that I have no idea of her character; I guess that women which male characters love with such madness as Julian loved her always are like that, because any real woman with real personality would inspire a more real love than that.
Now, for the evil characters. We don't know anything about Coubert other than him being the devil and Julian borrowing his name, so I can't comment on him. I must confess I don't even remember who Zacarias is - must be because by Jacinta's story there just had been too many characters and details in the story and I couldn't remember everything. As for Fumero, I'm surprised he wasn't also portrayed as boiling puppies alive and drinking infants' blood. He was totally exaggerated as a figure of Supreme Evil, and lacking all humanity, he wasn't any more convincing to me than Voldemort in Harry Potter. (In Harry Potter, the truly interesting villains are the Death Eaters, who are people. Like someone somewhere said, you don't look under your bed at night out of fear that Voldemort would be there, because Voldemort won't be there. The same with Fumero. There seemed to be a certain attempt to give Fumero a human side by showing how he grew up, but it didn't work for me. He seemed flat enough to begin with, and it didn't seem to me like his experiences drove him to being evil, he was just evil from the start. And I'm afraid I don't find that very interesting.
The questions reminded me of another character I liked - Miquel Moliner. I really liked him and felt terribly sorry for him. Maybe because he was one of the only characters in the story whose world didn't turn completely around himself, but he actually cared about others. Less self-absorbed characters tend to be more interesting.
Sorry if it bothers anyone that I'm being so critical, but perhaps it'll at least create some discussion.
Katri wrote: "If people who love the book want more positive discussion on the book, then it's up to the people who love the book to discuss it more. It's only natural that those who didn't love the book (who pr..."I agree. I probably should have prefaced my comment though and said that most of the people I know who enjoyed the book don't belong to this group. So I only meant that those who did read it here seemed to not like it. Sorry.
I need to finish this book so I can get into more detailed discussion. I think it's fine to say what you liked and disliked of any book. It helps get people involved. But it helps further the discussion when we can discuss specifics.
Thanks for posting the questions Robbie! Once I finish up I'll give you the answers. :)
Yeah, it's definitely good to discuss specifics. I think the only reason I didn't do it yet is that there seem to be people posting here who haven't finished the book, and I want to avoid spoiling too much. But it's already almost mid-November, so moving to more detailed discussion should happen!I'll think about the other questions, too. They just require more putting together of my thoughts, about the women and evil character I'd already thought about so I had something to say there.
I didn't mean to suggest I don't want to hear who liked and didn't like the book! Of course that's where most discussions should start. I just wanted us to move beyond that. Or at least everybody else move beyond that, so I can live vicariously through you, since I don't remember the book well enough to contribute much [embarrassed smiley here:]
Katri wrote: "Yeah, it's definitely good to discuss specifics. I think the only reason I didn't do it yet is that there seem to be people posting here who haven't finished the book, and I want to avoid spoiling ..."I think you just are going to have to forge ahead with your viewpoints. Just put SPOILER at the head of your comment and then it's everyone else's responsibility to be forewarned. (It's nice to put "Spoiler for Chapter [14:]", etc. if you know where you are, so people know if it's a spoiler for them or not.)
(And sometimes, when I see people are discussing the book I'm suppose to be reading, it lights a fire under me to finish it up! So really, you're doing me a favor! heh)
Mod
Seriously...I think it's pretty good. I'm reminded for some odd reason of GGM's Love in the Time of Cholera. Also a little of The Da Vinci Code. Which is a strange combination.
It seems that the last few books I've read lately have all centered around books and reading...or book stores. In The Thirteenth Tale, the main character grows up around a book store and is a big reader. In The Gurnsey Literary and Potato Pie Society...reading plays a key role in bringing people together. Same for The Book Thief, and now...The Shadow of the Wind is actually about a book within a book! I guess you could call it a trend.
I am starting to feel like the plot is a bit contrived and strung out...but if it all comes together nicely, it won't have been for naught!
This is a fascinating discussion and I'm only part way through reading everyone's comments. I'm with El that I found this story hard to get into and stick with. It took until around 300 pages in for me to be truly invested and interested in the outcome. I just felt like there was too much going on and too many points of view with little connecting them. I will jump in with more of my thoughts soon, but I wanted to get on the thread asap. Looking fowrard to everyone's thoughts!
Alison wrote: "Seriously...I think it's pretty good. I'm reminded for some odd reason of GGM's Love in the Time of Cholera. Also a little of The Da Vinci Code. Which is a strange combination."Alison, I found myself also thinking a lot of Garcia Marquez while reading this, especially the first line of One Hundred Years of Solitude: "Many years later, as he faced the firing squad, Colonel Aureliano Buendia was to remember that distant afternoon when his father took him to discover ice".
I feel Ruiz Zafon was going for a similar approach to writing, and was probably heavily influenced by Garcia Marquez... but again the attempt was sort of lost on me, maybe because I have read Garcia Marquez and appreciate what he has done for literature. In some ways I feel Ruiz Zafon wants to be on that same level, and while he has had success with his first book, personally it doesn't feel the same to me. Like he wanted to emulate other others too much, so I had trouble discerning which is his own voice. Again, it's hard to say probably until I read The Angel's Game. It's hard to base an author's entire career on one book, and Shadow of the Wind certainly wasn't bad enough for me to discount Zuiz Rafon entirely. I just wish I had felt differently while reading it.
El wrote: "Alison, I found myself also thinking a lot of Garcia Marquez while reading this, especially the first line of One Hundred Years of Solitude: "Many years later, as he faced the firing squad, Colonel Aureliano Buendia was to remember that distant afternoon when his father took him to discover ice"."I just finished One Hundred Years and Shadow (nor Angel) is no Garcia Marquez, by a long shot. But there is a familiar feeling which probably has to do with them both being of Spanish heritage. Culturally, there are probably many similar influences.
It's interesting that you mentioned One Hundred Years. I had an "aha!" moment when in Shadow one of the characters was named "Buendia". I mean, for all I know, it could be like "Johnson" or "Smith" in the Spanish world. And no one would go, "Hmmm, just read one book with a Smith and now this book has a Smith. What a coincidence!" But, I'm not Spanish, so for me I did wonder if there was some type of insider literary nod.
SPOIILRES (through Chapter 18)So I don't know if this has been mentioned before because I've tried to stay away from the comments that spoke specifically of the story since I haven't finished. But....
Does anyone else think it's incredibly odd that in Chapter 13, Daniel is "introduced" (figuratively speaking) to Nuria, who was the last known contact for Carax. Her father, Isaac (keeper of the cemetery), even gives him her contact information. And for FOUR YEARS (and four chapters later) no word is mentioned of her again. Only to reappear in Chapter 18, where the reader is informed that he had put the slip of paper with her address on it in a box where he keeps his sentimental knick knacks in?!
I realize that Daniel was ONLY 16 at the time he received Nuria's information, but it seems a bit odd that he hadn't ONCE thought to look her up. This is what drives me nuts about Zafon. Instead of taking all these different story threads and weaving some intricate design pattern, when you step back all you see are the knots and dangling loose ends.
Meghan wrote: "SPOIILRES (through Chapter 18)So I don't know if this has been mentioned before because I've tried to stay away from the comments that spoke specifically of the story since I haven't finished. ..."
I totally agree. I was frustrated that Daniel didn't follow through on the Nuria lead right away. Obviously that story line was going to go somewhere -- why couldn't it have happened sooner rather than later?
Megan, thanks for reminding me about the name "Buendia". It's been a long while since I read One Hundred Years and didn't make the initial connection when I came across the name again in Shadow.CONTINUED SPOILERS FROM MEGAN'S POST (#46)
I also agree that it was strange Daniel did not pursue the best lead he had; though not only was it strange that he did not pursue it for four years, but also it was strange he kept the piece of paper with his other sentimental objects. It's a conflicting thought that bugged me while I was reading it.
Anyone have any other opinions as to why Daniel did not pursue Nuria sooner? Was it intentional on the author's part, or perhaps just sloppy writing?
El wrote: "SPOILER..."SPOILER (through Chapter 26)
My belief is that Zafon dropped it because he wasn't ready to introduce Nuria to us yet. Meeting her earlier would have spoiled some of the other leads he wanted you to take. Everyone has their place in his story and he often drops BIG clues about them. But you can't make the connection until farther down the story.
Like he mentioned Miquel early on in the story and I knew that he was going to be someone important, and lo and behold, he is showing up again.
But it's frustrating waiting for Zafon to get to these conclusions. I think his writing skill isn't up to the complicated plot devices he wants to use. I think he depends on you NOT to notice that Nuria doesn't show up until 4 years later. He's very good at getting you to turn your attention away from this fact because "oohhh! something shiny!" appears over here.
He's a good literary magician. But once you figure out his trick, the illusion is spoiled and then all you see are the innerworkings, which is no fun.
I have to say that I actually managed to get distracted at that point, because I don't remember wondering about it too much... I did think about it a bit, wondering why he wouldn't go and find her, but then something distracted me and I didn't remember to wonder before she turned up again and I thought "Oh, finally her". And what you said about García Marquez, El... Yeah, I had such a feeling, too. Basically, when I'd finished the book, I thought back to what had been interesting and appealing about it and thought "Yeah, I could see that being really amazing to someone... but the problem is, I've already read books that did the same things but did them better". I wonder how many of the people who love Zafón just haven't read those other writers who do the same thing better. I'm not saying everyone - I just wonder if a part of the book's popularity comes from techniques he's borrowed from better writers who many of the readers just don't happen to know yet.
Katri wrote: "I wonder how many of the people who love Zafón just haven't read those other writers who do the same thing better. I'm not saying everyone - I just wonder if a part of the book's popularity comes from techniques he's borrowed from better writers who many of the readers just don't happen to know yet."That's a good point. I hope then this will open some eyes to writers like Garcia Marquez, as in, "If you like this author, you should also check out this one."
I can not say that The Shadow of the Wind is a good example of magical realism like Garcia Marquez or Isabel Allende (and others) necessarily, but I can see a lot of similar literary styles. But again, it felt more like an attempt at rather than an accomplishment. I think in time though when he finds more of his own voice Ruiz Zafon will be pretty fantastic.
The "literary magician" aspect - as Meghan suggests - is neat once, but an entire book of it can be tedious to read.
At least this discussion is making me think I need to get back to reading more of those authors! And yeah, usually people are better writers when they discover their own voice instead of trying to emulate others. About the discussion questions posted earlier, I've been trying to think of something else to say about them... A lot of them I can't think of answers to because I basically found that the problem in the book was that it didn't say meaningful things about those matters. However, I have been trying to think of Nuria's words about there being worse prisons than words... I think what she might have meant is fixed ideas, emotional obsessions that some people devote all their life to beyond all reason. Júlian does that with Penelope, both when he has her and after he's lost her, and also after he's found out she died, when he lets that transform himself into something not even human. And on the other hand Nuria herself does that with her devotion to Júlian that keeps her from introducing any other meaningful content into her life or from developing a real relationship with Miquel, who so much would deserve it.
Or she might have meant the feeling of guilt which had trapped Júlian after he found out about Penélope's fate.
Thoughts?
SPOILERS!My impression on the "worse prisons than words" was that in the beginning, Julian believed that when you write you put your whole self, your soul, into those stories. And when he left Barcelona, Miquel told him to write--not letters but stories--for him and for Penelope. And so each novel that he wrote, it was for "P" and by doing so, he put all his anguish and pain and longing and love and hope into them. And so one could say he was "imprisoned" by those novels. When he found that Penelope had died and all that hope was for nothing, he had to destroy that "self" and those dreams by destroying those books.
Yet Nuria knew that while his torture of losing Penelope was great, she was "imprisoned" by her love for a man who would never love her back. And there was no relief from it. She couldn't simply abolish some book to make it go away. Nor did she have the strength to walk away from that man. And so she was chained to her prison as firmly as if she were physically shackled in a cell.
I think Nuria also knew that Julian and Penelope were related. I think she was imprisoned with the choice of being the one to really shake Julian to his core with the truth or allow him to wallow in his pain yet still have the comfort of the lie.
Lastly, I would think Fermin's stint in Fumero's prison was probably far worse than anything Julian ever felt. Although I think pain is personal. What one man find life-ending, another may think nothing of. Perhaps the one who is most imprisoned is Fumero. So brutally beated down as a child, he lost his ability to see any good in life. That prison of darkness is probably the saddest of the whole story
The Rory Gilmore Book Club
Books mentioned in this topic
In the Time of the Butterflies (other topics)One Hundred Years of Solitude (other topics)
The Shadow of the Wind (other topics)
The Shadow of the Wind (other topics)
