Love in the Time of Cholera
discussion
Love in the time of Who cares?
message 1:
by
Jess
(new)
-
rated it 1 star
Jun 30, 2011 05:57PM

reply
|
flag


I have 100 Years of Solitude on my TBR pile but I fear it may sit there a while before I will try Marquez again, (although I do want to!)

I think the magical realism is more developed in 100 Years, and I really enjoyed those aspects.

I agree. GGMarquez is supposed to be a phenomenal writer but I can't enjoy any of his books? Maybe I need to read them in Spanish?!!! :) May I suggest Allende or Cohelo for Latin writers . . .


A lot of people speak of how they disliked the charaters. That's understandable, but it's also what the author probably intended. He didn't want to make them lovable, he wanted to make them realistic, and I think he succeeded. How many people do we meet in everyday life that we spontaneously adore or find irresistably interesting?

While reading 'Solitude' was a great fun, an experience of sorts, 'Cholera' was a tedious bore right till the end. And if it hasnt been for Marquez's unique/witty approach to prose writing, would have been very hard to finish.

You have got to give 'Solitude' a chance, it is an excellent piece of fiction, and holds no comparison with 'Cholera', reading which was an awful experience for me as well.





Regarding 100 years of solitude how could you not be moved by the woman in denial about her blindness or the way the banana factory strike and the deaths were simply erased from History?



Did anyone say why they hated the book?
I loved the book...If there is one book of GGM that is most hated it would be more 100 years of solitude than this one.
A total snore with silly, unlikeable characters.


I agree. In order to understand magic realism you have to deep into the Latin culture. What happens with GGM is not about the story itself but the description of the characters and how do they feel about each other and their environment.
Though the first time I read it I was 15 and I thought it was the greatest romantic story of all, ten years later I found that Florentino was a very obsessive man with a peculiar point of view. A hundred years of solitude is way much better

Glad that's off my chest (whew!). As far as the novel itself, I do love it. GGM has time and again said that "readers should not fall into his trap", understood as a warning that we are not to simplify this as a great love story overcoming all obstacles, but rather as a depiction of the power of obsessive love (and more specifically, the eternization of the concept of unilaterally being "in love"), in and of itself as confusing, and ultimately damaging and incapacitating when extended to extremes as any other sickness, such as cholera. It is clear that Florentino's life, centered on an ideal object of "love" fixed in his youth, has left him unable to actually make lasting connections to others outside the center of his obsession - hence the many lovers with whom he shares sex and nothing else, the treatment of America, his uncaring declaration of love to Fermina at the funeral, etc. Florentino can rationalize his behavior and gain acceptance from the reader by referring back to his never-ending, abstract "love" of Fermina, and part of the point is how much we, as readers, are able to forgive even the most uncaring actions when faced with the concept of "love". Do the actions match the words, and does "love" as an ideal, above all else and in no relation to other feelings and values, resist examination? Hardly so. Even in the end, when Florentino finally wins Fermina over, their love will only survive in an enclosed space, forever moving and not settling on a destination (the ship travelling up and down the river forever, with the yellow cholera flag raised), and therefore not open to examination by the outside world - because, as Fermina knows all too well as she decides to go along with it, when it is examined by others not under its spell the dream of this "love" in the overall scheme of things is likely to come apart at the seams.

If you do nothing more than see/feel the images and emotion that GGM imparts with his beautiful writing you could be satisfied even if you didn't ike the story.
I personally had my breathing affected just reading his beautiful prose.

One Hundred Years of Solitude is meat, potatoes, vegetables, sauces and spices, dessert, an open bar, and six hits of acid.
Guess which one bores me and which one I call my favorite book of all time.

http://asolitarypassion.blogspot.com/...


apologies for the late repsonse - the writing annoyed the hell out of most. as well as the characters and some of the plots - he was sleeping with a child in his care of about 13, I mean - horrible people!!

The sleeping with the 13 year old is definitely horrible. But didnt your group even think about the fact that this was in a Latin American country ...you can't always base your opinions on what you think the West would/should say/dictate... that is just too one-sided and narrow minded.
Cleopatra married her cousin...that too is horrible but people are ranting about Cleopatra....lol
just my two cents.
off topic: I wonder what "Western" people in book clubs says about the book THE BATTLE HYMN OF THE TIGER MOTHER....lol

Ever tried reading Shakespeare again or the Classics and notice how you have a deeper insight of the story and the moral/s?

You are entitled to your opinions, of course, but it is my belief that every book deserves a chance, a true chance, to reach you. And to truly reach many considerations must be made about the story and about the plausibility of it.

Your observations on the characters and the aspect of "love" in the book are spot on. I think it would've been a much better book had I not gone into it with the notion that it was, in fact, a love story. However, I must say that I felt the endless descriptions were dry and dull to me, which I think may have been the point.



I wish it had all been about the landscape as I thoroughly disliked almost all the characters. Spoilt rich people with little concern for those around them who inflated their petty little dislikes into extended arguments or a callous sex-addicted stalker who mistook compulsive obssesion for love.
As I read on I actually found this book offensive and I began to feel sullied by reading it. Basically the main 'romantic' character is a pedophile and takes advantage of a child who is supposed to be in his care, leading to disastrous results.
***spoiler**
And then the end was a total cop out in that they were all so proud of their love they hid on a boat and pretended to be sick with cholera!

Agreed..my book club uses this book at the benchmark for how bad other books are

I think the magical realism is more developed in..."<
Although Gabriel Garcia Marquez is a known magical realist author, I think he hadn't used it in his Love in the Time of Cholera unlike in his One Hundred Years of Solitude.

"
Allende is a good writer and Coelho is rubbish and both are far inferior to Marquez.
I would recomend Jorge Lui Borges (although i hate the bastard), Juan Carlos Onetti, Adolfo Casares... definitely not Coelho he is a below avarage thinker and his books are nicely promoted turds dressed in fancy colours of superficial ideas and mysticism (and if he walks into my local I will scream at him 'Oi Paulo, Nooooo!' and then I will confront him for the Alchemist and other crap he produced using paper and ink).
Love in the time of Cholera is in my opinion an excellent book although not as good as my personal favourites which are:
'Leaf storm', 'Chronicle of a death foretold', '100 years of solitude', and of course what I consider to be the Gabo's best book 'No one writes to the colonel'.
If a book club uses Love in the time of the Cholera as a benchmark for bad books, I would seriously consider to turn around and run, change name, leave the country, work as a prostitute in Santo Domingo and eat bread made with wet sand and sugar until my kidneys and various intestines fail and I hemorrhage slowly and painfully to death than meet with them ever again.
Sounds like the book club that will dedicate a month to Felice Leonardo "Leo" Buscaglia and might make you to love your mass-murdering partner (Mrs Asma al-Akhras) because love is to accept one another with their mistakes and their mistakes are as lovable as they are and their smelly shocks are too or picking their nose in public that is way too lovable love love.

I saw in some people's comments references to Isabel Allende, I also love her. She's a magnificent author!

I wish it had all been about the landscape as I thoroughly disliked almost all the characters. Spoilt rich ..."
Hi Esther, I think you misread the book. See my comment before in this thread. A lot of the things that you complain about feeling are exactly the intended response. Again, there's a trap in this book, as it is not intended as a parable of love to be held up and admired, but rather an examination of misdirected or idealized love (experienced from different angles, and different people) as a crippling, alienating (hence the boatride for eternity) and destructive force.
Cheers,
Marcelo



I actually quite liked the book but not as much as I had expected to. I thought I didn't like it when I first finished, but I found myself thinking about it and the people in it long after I was done. To me, that's the mark of an impactful book.


I agree with you on how much it was drawn-out! The language made it bearable, but it took me a good month or so to get through it because it just got repetitive in places.
This was my first Marquez book, and I have a 100 years of Solitude on my bookshelf to read but I'm a little apprenhensive of starting it now.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
Love in the Time of Cholera (other topics)
Books mentioned in this topic
The Shadow of the Wind (other topics)Love in the Time of Cholera (other topics)