The Rory Gilmore Book Club discussion
Rory Book Discussions
>
The Shadow of the Wind
date
newest »
newest »
El wrote: "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...."I totally agree. I think if you read The Angel's Game, you will see more "magical realism" in that story than in Shadow. However, I thought it was (even more) weakly written than Shadow.
BUT, for people who DID enjoy Shadow (and I can understand why some people enjoy this book), I think you're right that they should check out these other authors. I think you can find a lot of Spanish/Latin American authors who are similar to Zafon and more likely write a better story.
Julia Alvarez (who wrote In the Time of the Butterflies) is another writer I think belongs in this category. When I first read that book I didn't care for it, but more because I didn't enjoy the genre. Now that I'm older and appreciate works like Garcia Marquez, I think I would enjoy her work much better. I do remember thinking her writing was beautiful.
I've read this book a while ago and thought it was really wonderfull! Zafon has a way of taking you into his story, I couldn't stop reading...My grandmother also liked it very much!
Katri wrote: "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?..."SPOILERS
You make a really interesting point about Clara vs Bea. If you read TAG, you kind of see the similarities of Bea's character to someone else and what her purpose is. (My guess is that Zafon has thought this would be a 4 book series, spanning various generations. So the fact that Daniel and Bea have a son makes it likely her purpose is to spawn the next book.)
Now Clara at first seemed to be the interesting one. And then she turned out all flat (as you said). What was her purpose other than I think, to a man, his first love is one he never forgets. And while Daniel loves Bea, there will always be a part of him that holds a special place for Clara. And for him to see her now as she is, her beauty fading and her spirit tinged with bitterness, I think it adds a layer of sadness to his already sad existence.
But like you said, that story was not well developed.
1. 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? SPOILERS
To me, this is the whole point of the book. Daniel's life takes on the same path as Julian's, in some ways, almost frighteningly similar ways. But Zafon loses this thread with too much distraction so that when you are reminded of this similarity, it seems forced and contrived.
I don't think Daniel does avoid tragedy. Julian tried to kill himself by burning down the warehouse with himself in it, only to be rescued. Daniel saves Julian's life by stepping in front of the bullet, only to be rescued by blood transfusions from Fermin.
The only difference between Daniel's tragedy having a "happyily ever after" ending and Julian's "I'm okay" ending is that Penelope died giving birth and Bea did not. So I'm thinking there wasn't much in what Daniel did at all. (Maybe by forcing Bea's father/Tomas to accept him versus running away?) But as Penelope was Julian's half-sister, there could be no happily ever after for him.
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? SPOILER
This is something I think Zafon wants to touch on quite a bit. Only, I don't really know where he's going with it because he tends to lose his point (or never really makes it).
Coubert represents the demons within Julian. Julian becomes Coubert because he himself becomes a smoldering body of anger, hurt, and pain. He lashes out at his books because he cannot lash out at the people he wants to (Penelope, her father, his father, etc.).
Zacarias represents the magical realism that Zafon inserts into his writing, although I don't really think he fully commits to the genre. I think given Jacinta's religious beliefs and her own barrenness, she needed to believe that she would have a child of her own somehow. Some people believe in spirits or angels. I think Zacarias was Jacinta's.
Fumero is the devil on earth. He represents the evil within mankind. He is a psychopath killer born in an era that rewarded such mindsets. He was the most frightening character for me because he does really exist. Zafon may not have wrote it well, but his brand of torture is seen time after time in the history books. He kills like a cat, playing with his mouse before the final death blow. It takes a strong person to be able to stand up to that and cut through the terror to recognize that it all dwells in a fury of fear.
The villians are better in this book I think.
Mod
Mod
SPOILERS
I don't love this novel, but I really like it. I like how this is a book about books and book lovers, and there is a book within a book. I think avid readers can appreciate things mentioned in the novel. There are lots of quotable quotes too.
Within the first half of the book I was already quite certain that Lain Coubert is actually Julian. But I didn't expect that he and Penelope were brother and sister. I also like the parallels between Daniel and Julian. I thought it was telling how some people who knew Julian are reminded of him when they meet Daniel. The relationship Daniel has with his father is also very heartwarming.
When the author wrote that Daniel would die in seven days time, I was shocked and a bit disappointed because I had grown to like him. But it does somehow add to the suspense as the end of the story progresses. How will Daniel die? Will it be in some sort of confrontation with Fumero and Julian? What will happen to his father, Fermin and Bea once Daniel dies? And then it turns out that Daniel doesn't die at all, that his heart only stops for a while. It's a bit of a cheap trick on the author's part, but I can't say I'm not glad Daniel is alive.
As for the other characters: Fermin is really funny, but he talks too much. I think the author wasted too many pages describing Daniel and Fermin's conversations, stakeouts, and musings on girls. On Clara, I don't see the significance of her character in the storyline, except for being the first person Daniel can talk to who understands the brilliance of Carax's books, and the first who mentions Fumero. Ah, Fumero. I never thought he would be the main villain. I think the author portrays him well as the representation of the evils of war.
Mod
SPOILERS
As I said, I guessed that Coubert is Julian, but it was a surprise to know that he lived as "Miquel" for a few years with Nuria. I felt sad for both Nuria and Miquel as they both love someone who will never love them back. I don't know what to think about Bea except that she is to Daniel what Penelope is to Julian, and there is a looming threat that she will meet the same end.
I think the author did a good job on describing Barcelona, and even better on the terrors during the civil war. Sometimes there are discrepancies in the story, probably because of the shift in narrators. Like someone earlier mentioned, the part with Nuria's letter doesn't seem believable sometimes because it's impossible for her to know all of it.
It took me quite some time to finish the book, but it was more because I was generally not in a good reading mood, and not because of the book itself. It got more exciting as it nears the end -- and a satisfying one, at that. So overall, my likes for this book exceed my dislikes.
Any read his new book the Angel's Game? I'm all most finished with it, and it is as good as the shadow in the wind.
Alison wrote: "Re: GGM & Zafon...also, the name Fermin was very familiar to the name Fermina from Love...Cholera. But, like you say, those could be common Spanish names. However, since there were so many famou..."That made me laugh out loud. I wouldn't doubt it. heh
Jonathan, you MUST see Barcelona some day. It is tremendous and beautiful and amazing. Guadi's creations look like candy-coated confections stuck in the middle of an modern urban city. The Ramblas is extraordinary with all its street vendors and performers in the median. (The movie Vicki Christina Barcelona gives you a taste of the city as well.) But I would like to go back and see if I see any of Zafon's Barcelona in this great city.
I have had mixed feelings about the book. I loved it at times and at others, I just wanted to chuck it out of the window. Here's a link to my review:http://tometravelling.blogspot.com/20...
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)
What did people think of the story within the story? Did you find it an interesting way to reveal more of the truth? Or was it distracting and convenient?