The Unbearable Lightness of the Author
Wonyoung Choi 2016-05-31
The "author"
in the title of this article is Ildefonso Falcones, a Spanish Lawyer and
novelist. The title of this article is a parody of the novel [The Unbearable
Lightness of Being] by the Czech writer Milan Kundera. This article has nothing
to do with the noble and the film of the same name in terms of the content. This
article is solely about the novelist Falcones.
Falcones
published three novels [The Cathedral of the Sea][1],
[The Hand of Fátima] and [The Barefoot Queen][2]
as of the time of this writing. [The Cathedral of the Sea] narrates the life of
a son of a serf in the 14th century Spain in a totally chronological form. It
was first published in 2006. The front cover of the 2009 edition says
"International Bestseller" and the next page says that over 4 million
copies are sold internationally. The last page introduces [The Hand of Fátima]
as a story of a Muslim boy in the Christian Spain. [The Barefoot Queen] was
published in 2013 and is about the lives of Gypsies in the 18th century Spain. Judging
from the publication dates, the author wrote a novel every 3-4 years. Wikipedia
says that Falcones wrote [The Cathedral of the Sea] in 4 years.[3]
Falcones specializes in history novel. For an active lawyer, 3-4 years seems to
be too short to write a history novel. I read [The Cathedral of the Sea] and
[The Barefoot Queen], and I want to show a few problems of Falcones that I felt
in those two novels.
1. Anachronism
In [The Cathedral
of the Sea] there appear condoms ("capuchones", p. 271). Considering
the characters and the era in the novel, the mode of use of condoms is in 18th
century, a 400 years apart. In [The Barefoot Queen] there appears a magic
lantern (pp. 564-565). The first glass plate photography appeared in 1839[4].
Because a magic lantern requires photography, it should be invented later than
photography, a 100 years after the era in the novel. There appears ice cream
(p.91). In a prison, prisoners throw the urine in the chamber pot to the street
through windows. (p. 445) However, there were septic tanks in that era and are
mentioned in the novel itself (p. 579). It is hard to believe that excreta was
thrown out of the windows from a prison, a public building, in Madrid, the
capital city. Even resuscitation is mentioned (p. 719), which is a 19-20th
century thing.[5]
There are
completely opposite narrations about dowry. In [The Cathedral of the Sea] dowry
is given to a woman from a man in a situation (p. 244) while to a man from a
woman in another situation (pp. 247, 429). Page 247 is actually the very next
page to page 244. No matter whether it is a mistake or carelessness of
Falcones, it is worse than anachronism.
History novels
have historical facts and historical conditions as a background. Errors and
distortions of this sort should result in serious distrust of the contents of
the book and the sincerity of the author. I think that the purpose of studying
history is to understand the relationship between the historical events and
their historical conditions and thereby to understand the present problems and
find the right solutions. I understand that that's exactly what E. H. Carr
meant in his famous phrase that history "is a continuous process of
interaction between the historian and his facts, an unending dialogue between
the past and the present"[6].
If the historical fact itself is distorted, it is not a history novel.
Condoms and the
treatment of excreta said above as examples are, I think, not errors but
intentional to attract readers' curiosity. If they are errors, the author is lazy;
if intentional, the author deceptive; in any case, the author and the novel
questionable. Following problems are basically the result of such being
questionable.
2. Nonsenses
In [The Cathedral
of the Sea], there is a customary law that grants feudal lords the privilege to
rape the bride of his serf on the wedding day. (pp. 22, 28-29)
In [The Barefoot
Queen], wealthy women hire wet nurses to maintain the shape of the body, which
is dubbed "vanities of the tit" [sic.] (p. 423). Wet nurses
breast-feed the baby in their house. They keep the baby wrapped tight with a sheet
of cloth, which sometimes results in deformity of the baby. (pp. 569-570) The
scene of tobacco trafficking (pp. 137-40) makes me laugh. The seller discharges
large bags of tobacco randomly and the buyers select them as they like. The
process is a total chaos and some buyers steal from others, as was written in
the novel. I wonder whether Falcones ever imagined how the payment could be
made. To my common sense and experience, no commercial transaction is made this
way in any circumstances.
The worst
nonsense is the scene that Melchor comes back home after stealing the money
from the trafficker who stole his tobacco at the tobacco trafficking mentioned
above with a live circus bear. Afterwards, the bear never appears again in this
novel, albeit Melchor's seemingly important dialogue, "the bear brought the
half of the money" (p. 185).
3. Stability of
characters
In [The Cathedral
of the Sea], the protagonist Arnau is a perfect man: pious Catholic, philanthropic
without limit, sexually strong enough to satisfy lustful Aledis, stoic with
iron will to avoid sex for 8 years from 38 years of age, an experienced soldier
and shrewd strategist, a revolutionist that abolished all the irrational
customary laws, a seasoned entrepreneur and banker; someone like Lincoln,
Buffett, Aquinas, Nelson in one body; a naïve boy who believed in Santa Clause
until 8 years old (pp. 93-94) and matured early to ask a man the permission to
marry his daughter at 14 years of age (pp. 243-244). Arnau's younger brother
Joan is more mature than his brother at first but becomes as naïve around 10
years old as his brother at the age of 8. Many characters have born and
causeless hatred or contradictory personalities such as reasonability and
irrationality, goodness and cruelty, at the same time or subsequently without
any opportunity.[7]
In [The Barefoot
Queen], it is not easy to find a character with consistency. Caridad, one of
the protagonist, was a slave and extremely passive in every aspect but she
becomes an excellent business manager (c. 40), acquires leadership (c. 31), and
becomes active in personality. Milagros, another protagonist, reckless,
frivolous, and rebellious (cc. 3, 8). She is virtuous generally but seductive
furtively sometimes (p. 177, 671). Friar Joaquín is a tobacco trafficker, is pious
yet renouces priest in order to marry Milagros, is stupid, timid, and
irresolute. Pedro García is the most vicious personality but his personality is
not mentioned until almost the half of the novel and afterwards jealousy, meanness,
cruelty are added to his personality. I feel that this character is not
pre-designed but changing as necessitated by the progress of the story. The
relationship with his wife Milagros is also changing into a monetary exploiter,
a pimp prostituting his own wife, and a wife-killer. There are a few relatively
consistent characters but these are minor characters. Their limited exposure
could be the reason of their apparent consistency but none of them are normal
in common sense.
4. Coincidences
In [The Cathedral
of the Sea], the protagonist becomes a soldier to escape from an adulterous
relationship. The period of being a soldier was, though not very clear, less
than a year, which, I think, is not really necessary for the development of the
story afterwards. His mistress set out to pursue his lover, now a soldier, to
end up with encountering Francesca, the mother of the protagonist, by pure
coincidence. Events such as the protagonist's father getting involved in a
riot, or such as the protagonist's younger brother becoming an inquisitor, all
happens as a result of coincidences.[8]
In [The Barefoot
Queen], Melchor, one of the protagonist, leaves and rejoins with his loved ones
(daughter Ana, granddaughter Milagros, lover Caridad, etc.) various times and
all these partings and reunions are results of coincidences. The scene of Ana's
returning home after escaping the prison is the worst case that could happen
only if multiple coincidences cooperate. (cc. 47-48)
5. Vanity of
knowledge
Falcones is an
active lawyer in Barcelona. [The Cathedral of the Sea] also has Barcelona as
the background. Barcelona is the capital city of the autonomous community of
Catalonia and Catalan language is used widely along with Spanish. So I believe
that Falcones knows Catalan. In [The Cathedral of the Sea], there are many
Catalan words. [The Barefoot Queen] is a story of Gypsies and shows some words
of Gypsy language (caló). I don't think Falcones knows Gypsy language. This
novel hardly requires to use any Gypsy language either. Then, why does Falcones
use a language that he himself does not know well nor is necessary? If Falcones
should write a novel with a background of Galicia, would he introduce Galician
language too? If so, I believe that it is a duty for a learned man that he
himself should learn the necessary minimum.
[The Cathedral of
the Sea] introduces a few customary laws in the 14th century feudalistic era.
Some of them are important for the story. For example, the customary law that
grants feudal lords the privilege to rape the bride of his serfs on the wedding
day is an important motive for this novel. However many other customary laws
totally irrelevant with the story or motive are introduced, sometimes
repeatedly. If Falcones thought that these customary laws were irrational, he
should have studied why existed and how were applied these and should have explained
nicely. Just throwing them to the readers, I think, is a sort of vanity to show
off his undigested knowledge. Falcones could have thought that these customary
laws were not irrational for any reason that I cannot even imagine. But as a
due courtesy to many readers who might think them absolutely nonsense dropping
their jaws, he should have been explained the historical context or rationale
of those customary laws somewhat and somehow, which is anticipated for
historical novels.
I think that
Falcones is a hypocritical lawyer who babbles in the vanity of knowledge yet
keeps silence when he should not.
6. Character and
author
Characters in a
novel do not necessarily represent the author. However, improbable events,
narrations, behaviors firstly damage the integrity of character and secondly
make questionable the intention and the nature of the author. Improbable
fiction reveals the hidden 'being'.
In [The Cathedral
of the Sea], characters lack integrity while the message such as justice will
prevail and good triumphs over the evil, is excessively clear. The message
feels like imposed values of the author rather than a conflict of values or a
suggestion of an issue.
In [The Barefoot Queen], there are many events, narrations, and behaviors
that are totally inconsistent with the situation: the bear mentioned above;
unnecessary and of "perversion" (p. 671) sexual expressions (pp. 43,
598, 612); silly jokes that are completely out of place (p. 582). I wonder
whether it is to attract the attention of the reader easily or whether the
author himself does perversion in reality or in fantasy.
7. Manipulation
of concept (definition)
In the early part
of [The Barefoot Queen] Falcones narrates as if the Gypsy laws are separate
from the Spanish law. "Nothing and nobody can bind us." (p. 55) Many
characters also ignore the Spanish laws and behave as if they have
extraterritoriality. Gypsy to Gypsy murder (c. 6) nor Gypsay to non-Gypsy
murder (cc. 15, 22) are never brought to the court of law. However, near the
end of the novel he narrates: "Gypsy law is that of the road, that of the
nature and the land, that of the liberty, (nomadic Gypsies) not that of those
Gypsies … living with non-Gypsies as cowards (settled Gypsies)" (p. 716),
"justice of the king, as everyone who happen to be in his land" (p.
694). The point is that the royal laws predominated over Gypsy laws that exist
as inferior autonomous laws. My common sense is that the latter was the reality
in the era in the novel. [The Barefoot Queen] has the 'Grand Gypsy Round-up'
(Gran Redada) in 1749 as its historical
background. The essence is the repression against Gypsy by the state power.
However, as a result of the manipulation of concept argued above, the issue of
state-vs-Gypsy becomes an issue of Gypsy-vs-Gypsy, in other words an issue
among and within Gypsy groups, conflicts between nomadic Gypsies and settled
Gypsies. "Gypsy problem"(p. 743) shrinks even to the rivalry of two
families, Vaga vs García, effectively eliminating the "problem".
'Orgullo' is an
important word that appears frequently. This word means 'pride', 'self-respect',
'arrogance', etc. This word is used with different meanings in different situations.
Roughly speaking, Gypsies used it to mean 'pride' while non-Gypsies to mean 'arrogance'.
Using the same word to express both positive and negative meaning is very
viciously tricky manipulation of concept. I think that Falcones is very much so.
Falcones, through
the manipulation of concept, develops a story as he likes, albeit confusing to
the readers. Law and philosophy educate intensively this kind of mistakes. A
lawyer who studied law should not do that.
Conclusion
To summarize points
mentioned above, I think:
1. Falcones is an
unstoppable talker.
2. [The Cathedral
of the Sea] is a self-righteous self-display.
3. [The Barefoot
Queen] is a perverted self-contradiction.
([The Barefoot
Queen] is an enigma. I don't know the subject. I cannot find the sympathy for
nor the antipathy against Gypsy. Falcones is stingy with Gypsy culture and
tradition that he says that it is not clear whether flamenco, usually ascribed
to Gypsy, is of Gypsy or of Hungary in the Note of the Author at the end of the
book (p. 745). He could and, as the author of this novel, should have muted. After
finishing a long novel of 740 pages about Gypsy, he said that there is no
written tradition in this [Gypsy] community. (p. 744) This is almost the
definition of self-contradiction.)
My conclusion: 'The
Unbearable Lightness of Falcones'.
End.
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기