50books_poc | Once Upon a Quinceanera: Coming of Age in the USA by Julia Alvarez

I bet you Alvarez used Spanish which wouldn't be obvious to English-speakers on purpose. It's a defamiliarizing tactic, a linguistic reminder that you're reading a book written from a particular perspective. Another function may be to mimic the experience of being in a foreign culture, not knowing what's going on, literally not understanding. And lastly, I don't know how much experience you've had with foreign languages, but translations are always inaccurate (probably the things which translate worst are poetry and colloquialisms). Using certain Spanish words and phrases may make her writing more accurate, more truthful.

And then I did some quick googleresearch to check that Alvarez wasn't born and raised in the US, and guess what she says on her website (http://www.juliaalvarez.com/about/):

It's not like I didn't know some English at ten when we landed in New York City. But classroom English, heavily laced with Spanish, did not prepare me for the "barbaric yawp" of American English -- as Whitman calls it. I couldn't tell where one word ended and another began. I did pick up enough English to understand that some classmates were not very welcoming. Spic! a group of bullies yelled at me in the playground. Mami insisted that the kids were saying, Speak! And then she wonders where my storytelling genes come from.

When I'm asked what made me into a writer, I point to the watershed experience of coming to this country. Not understanding the language, I had to pay close attention to each word -- great training for a writer.

You're right about her doing it on purpose--she's one of the writers I study, and she definitely makes those choices very deliberately. It becomes even more obvious when you look at her poetry. I don't know that I'd say translations are inaccurate, though (translations are what I study) but the issue is that the connotations, the full cultural meaning or context is impossible to transmit in translation.

That makes it a fine needle to thread, then-- making it accessible while still giving the right flavor. I also couldn't figure out from the Amazon listing and reviews how much she targeted the book to an 'outsider' audience and how much to an 'insider' audience, who would presumably be more familiar with the Spanish terms.

She may not always be trying to make it accessible. But yes, it's a delicate balance, for sure.

She may not always be trying to make it accessible.

Yeah, and that's legit too.

I bet you Alvarez used Spanish which wouldn't be obvious to English-speakers on purpose. It's a defamiliarizing tactic, a linguistic reminder that you're reading a book written from a particular perspective. Another function may be to mimic the experience of being in a foreign culture, not knowing what's going on, literally not understanding. And lastly, I don't know how much experience you've had with foreign languages, but translations are always inaccurate (probably the things which translate worst are poetry and colloquialisms). Using certain Spanish words and phrases may make her writing more accurate, more truthful.

It doesn't seem like a very good way of transmitting unfamiliar ideas and concepts to people who don't know the language or the culture. I always thought that clarity and making concepts comprehensible to the reader were part of a writer's job. What's the point of making sure that part of your audience DOESN'T understand you?

(This is not a problem solely with Alvarez. I've had similar difficulties with other authors--Agatha Christie comes to mind, as she's inclined to let Hercule Poirot explain matters to Hastings in French for whole paragraphs. Which is fine, if you speak the language. It's not so fine if you don't.)

Edited 2009-05-24 09:51 (UTC)

Bear with me, this is kind of what I'm working on right now, academically, so feel free to yell at me if I get lecture-y.

The misunderstandings are part of the point--it's a way of illustrating bilingualism and living in several cultures simultaneously, which leads to a) needing to explain yourself constantly to people who lack one or more of your cultural backgrounds, and b) being confused yourself, unable to "translate" things from your childhood to your adult life, for example. So by using that in their writing, these writers are playing around with understanding and meaning. They're actually not necessarily trying to explain everything; rather, they're experimenting with how much of a story you can tell when (some of) your readers don't understand everything. (Also, these works may not be written primarily for white readers.)

It's actually different from the Golden Age detective novels, where the use of French sometimes seems more of a way to show off an education. Dorothy Sayers, at least, tends to include translations. Also, Alvarez and similar writers don't tend to include whole Spanish passages--Giannina Braschi does, but her works are impossible to read if you don't know both English and Spanish, and she likes it that way.

The misunderstandings are part of the point--it's a way of illustrating bilingualism and living in several cultures simultaneously, which leads to a) needing to explain yourself constantly to people who lack one or more of your cultural backgrounds, and b) being confused yourself, unable to "translate" things from your childhood to your adult life, for example. So by using that in their writing, these writers are playing around with understanding and meaning. They're actually not necessarily trying to explain everything; rather, they're experimenting with how much of a story you can tell when (some of) your readers don't understand everything.

I would probably give up and find something else. I'm sure that you're right and that the confusion is the point...but I don't WANT to read a novel or a non-fiction book and be confused. So I would figure that the book had an invisible sign--"no non-Hispanics need apply"--and go find something that might not be as good but which would, at least, be comprehensible.

It's actually different from the Golden Age detective novels, where the use of French sometimes seems more of a way to show off an education.

It comes across the same way to me, though. "I'm smarter than you. I know a language that you don't. And I don't WANT you to understand me, so I'm going to speak as much as I can in words and phrases that I know you won't comprehend. And I won't translate a thing."

I would probably give up and find something else. I'm sure that you're right and that the confusion is the point...but I don't WANT to read a novel or a non-fiction book and be confused. So I would figure that the book had an invisible sign--"no non-Hispanics need apply"--and go find something that might not be as good but which would, at least, be comprehensible.

I get that it might feel really frustrating. Honestly though, you haven't read Alvarez, or you said so upthread, and she doesn't actually use that much Spanish. The phrases are not all that difficult to look up, either. Of course it's your prerogative to choose other novels to read (it's not like you need anyone's approval for that) but I have to object to this:

It comes across the same way to me, though. "I'm smarter than you. I know a language that you don't. And I don't WANT you to understand me, so I'm going to speak as much as I can in words and phrases that I know you won't comprehend. And I won't translate a thing."

Agatha Christie and Dorothy Sayers learned French as part of a very prestigious university education. Julia Alvarez learned English in an environment where her mother tongue had no status, where she was constantly bullied for being Latina, where English was enormously difficult and American culture was very hard to understand. The fact that she turns it around in her writing isn't an effort to present herself as smarter than her readers, it's an attempt to represent the way reality works for people who have similar experiences. If we don't (and I don't--I'm bilingual but my cultural background is solidly Western), we have to contend with being confused and either look things up or choose to read something else.

Honestly though, you haven't read Alvarez, or you said so upthread, and she doesn't actually use that much Spanish.

Actually, I didn't say whether I'd read Alvarez. But you're right. I haven't. I'll give her a shot and see what I think.

Ah, my bad, you said "it doesn't seem like," which was what made me assume you hadn't read it and then I didn't double-check to see whether you actually had said so outright. It'd be interesting to see what you think.

I circled phrases and words I didn't know as I read the book and afterwards looked them all up. There were only two or three that I couldn't find easily through Google.

I would figure that the book had an invisible sign--"no non-Hispanics need apply"--and go find something that might not be as good but which would, at least, be comprehensible.

That would probably not be indicated in a book which is WRITTEN IN ENGLISH except for a few phrases and words.

I would figure that the book had an invisible sign--"no non-Hispanics need apply"

I disagree with this. For one thing, there are Latinos who don't speak Spanish and Spanish speakers who aren't Latino. But also, as others have said, this is a book written in English with some Spanish words and phrases that you can look up in a dictionary or on the Internet if you want to get all the meaning you can. She's writing about her culture and part of that culture is bilingualism and codeswitching, so it makes sense to me that that would be part of her writing as well.

What's codeswitching?

Ack, I guess I should have spelled that with a hyphen. Here's the Wikipedia article, but basically it's when multilingual people switch between languages within the same conversation.

One of the things it mentions in that article is that in the past linguists considered it substandard language use but they've since come to believe it's a normal thing that's appropriate in some contexts. A lot of US Latino writers have grown up not only being told by English speakers that they shouldn't speak Spanish but being told by Spanish speakers (especially upper-class Spanish speakers) that they shouldn't code-switch, that their way of speaking and writing is inferior to real. Spanish. Mixing Spanish with English in their literature can be a way of contesting that voice of authority, of saying, "No, my language is legitimate." For me that makes the situation of Latino writers using Spanish a lot different from British authors using French, though I can see where it would be equally frustrating for some readers.

Ah. I hadn't heard of code-switching before. That article makes sense, and I can see why Alvarez would be doing it in her writing.

(And I've certainly heard the "Puerto Rican/Cuban/Mexican/Latin American Spanish isn't REAL Spanish" argument, just as I've heard the "Quebecois French isn't REAL French" bit. I can see that hearing that your language wasn't quite real would be annoying, because it would mean that you weren't quite real either.)

Okay. I think I'm beginning to get this. Thank you.

And as I said upthread, I'm going to look for her books in the library and see for myself what I think.

Cool, I hope you enjoy her books! I haven't read the book being reviewed here but I liked the novel How the Garcia Girls Lost Their Accents, a story about an immigrant family, and loved In the Time of the Butterflies, a historical novel about young women who opposed the Trujillo dictatorship in the D.R. :)

I would argue that the use of French is not so much to 'show off' but more to draw on a common vocabulary Christie, et. al would've had in common. Most European countries, not just England, do a better job with teaching other languages than our own does, and especially at the level of education Christie and her assumed readers would've had-- it's like using Netspeak today to convey a certain attitude or mood.

You're right about that, I expressed myself poorly. I'm European, so I'm well aware of the difference in language teaching; what I wanted to point out was a level of privilege that Christie's readers had, which Alvarez's readers would not have had. As in, Spanish is a language of lower status than English, whereas a use of French in the mystery novels of that era told your readers that you had a certain kind of education.

I haven't read this book so can't speak for if it is written well.

But in general, from what I can tell making your work deliberately semi-opaque is a common literary technique. Look at all the science fiction and fantasy authors who use made-up words for things that are basically horses or whatever to create a sense of alien-ness. Or authors who use symbolism and allegory or dream-sequences so you never quite know what's literally happening. Have you read anything by Gene Wolfe? I like his stuff but I never have more than half a clue what just happened.

To be honest I tend not to like these techniques, but I've seen them done well. Like any technique they're partly a matter of taste.

(Also I wouldn't classify Agatha Christie the same way, I think that's more an artifact of an earlier time when more people spoke french. Dorothy L Sayers and Charlotte Bronte do it too, really makes me wish I'd studied french rather than german at school :) )

Does trying to read Gene Wolfe count?

I suppose that making things semi-opaque could be done well. I can't think of any examples of it being done well, but I concede the possibility.

Also I wouldn't classify Agatha Christie the same way, I think that's more an artifact of an earlier time when more people spoke french. Dorothy L Sayers and Charlotte Bronte do it too, really makes me wish I'd studied French rather than German at school.

I'm not sure it's an artifact of an earlier era. One of the people whose work I proofread is English, and I recall one manuscript in which one of her heroes turned to another person and spoke two or three lines of (to me) incomprehensible French. I couldn't tell what was being said from the context or from the other person's reply (which was something along the lines of, "Yes, I agree"), so I asked her what the French meant.

She was rather shocked to discover that I had no clue what was being said, and that I'd had to resort to Babelfish to get even an approximation of a translation, albeit a surreal one It hadn't occurred to her that some readers might not understand.

(I'm also not sure that taking French in school would have helped. I had two years of French, four years of Latin and two years of Spanish. The Latin is the only one that halfway stuck, and even then I need dictionaries and grammar books.)

Oh I'm sure there's still some people who assume that "everyone" speaks french, but in the 1930s (or 1850s) that assumption was more reasonable and thus more common. (If classist, I'm pretty sure the majority of everyday people didn't know french. I think. Maybe?)

You're right, now that I think of it the odd times I've encountered untranslated german in books or movies I've at best been able to get the vague gist of what was being said. *remembers the Dr Who episode with the Daleks going "Exterminieren! Exterminieren!" which isn't even a real german word*

Interesting. I've not read any Gene Wolfe but I think now I want to try.

He's pretty awesome. My favourite thus far is "The Book of the New Sun" (a fantasy series in four parts). Though, yes, you really don't ever fully know what all the events or words mean. One of the cool things is that it's set in a post-technological far-future so you'll have scenes where the main character describes something using his vocabulary and concepts, and it's strange and interesting, and then you go "Oh wait! That's a picture of a guy in a space-suit on the moon!" or whatever and it's a whole different skew on the situation. Apparently the book is full of stuff like that but most of it went over my head :)

writing like this called "semi-opaque" and to "create a sense of alien-ness"? Really?

I'm not an english graduate or anything, that's just the way I see it as someone who reads books. I would describe it as semi-opaque, but I have no idea if anyone other than me has used the term to mean that, I'm not even sure it's a real word :) (And similarly, that's what I think the authors are doing, that's certainly the effect it has on me)

Sounds like you want to sit back and be spoon-fed your education on Other People.

I don't think writers are obligated to make it easy for their readers, taking into account the expected audience. Sometimes readers have to work. This doesn't just go for whether you're reading a book about the experience of a marginalized/oppressed group you don't belong to, but in this case: a writer who is a PoC is no obligated to break everything down into easily digestible chunks for people who don't want to, for example, find a Spanish-English dictionary or use google.

I think Alvarez and Christie are a weird comparison, in this situation. Christie was probably assuming that her readers *would* know a fair amount of French, hence whole paragraphs of the stuff - so we're talking about British class politics in the earlier 20th century. Whereas Alvarez is a cultural and linguistic Other in the country in which she writes, and a writer who (it seems) is consciously making it difficult for the native English speakers who compose part of her audience.

I think Alvarez and Christie are a weird comparison, in this situation

It's not a weird comparison. I have the same reaction to spy novels that pepper the text with foreign words and don't explain them.

I want to understand what the writer is saying. Any writer. White, PoC, whatever. I just want to understand. I think that communicating with the audience is part of the point.

Whether the writer is being unclear because she expects the audience to be bilingual or because she DOESN'T expect the audience to be bilingual and WANTS to confuse them, the end result is still confusion. And I don't see that one kind of confusion is any better than the other because the writer's reasons for causing it differ.

And Googling isn't always as useful as all that. I do know this, because I've tried it with other writers who pull the same thing. Foreign words often shift form according to tense or declension. It isn't always possible to find the words online in a particular form that you're looking for. Or you can find and translate the words, but you're translating an idiom which, if you take it literally, is nonsensical. So I'm left with a translated phrase (probably badly translated, considering that I don't speak the language) and no concept of what it means.

That's happened to me a number of times. It doesn't add anything to my experience of the book. It just makes me feel that I'm missing a lot, because I'm pretty sure I'm not grasping all the meanings or connotations or idioms even when I look the words up.

In this case, the author is communicating by using Spanish that monolingual English-speaking readers may not understand. For some readers, she's communicating the feeling that we're missing something, and that works for me. (I am missing things -- cultural nuances, memories of similar experiences, a whole lot of things that other readers may not be missing. It's a reminder that I'm reading from a distance.) If it doesn't work for you, that's unfortunate, but what you're arguing feels to me like saying Tolkien writes badly because you have difficulty with archaic language. That's a valid reason not to read Tolkien, but it's a feature, not a bug.

Anyway -- I don't think there's anything wrong with writing specifically for a bilingual English and Spanish speaking audience, but Alvarez isn't an example of that. I don't speak any Spanish and I haven't had trouble understanding her books. Sometimes I skip over a phrase (or look it up, which I have done successfully with Google), but I used to do that all the time when I was 8 and still learning a lot of the less common English words. (Which many authors use without regard for the parts of their audience who will have difficulty with them, because while they may not be transparent to every person who reads English-language novels, they add something to the text.)

I was often frustrated by Alvarez's use of Spanish words and idioms, of which she rarely provided translation.

It takes English-only speakers work, then, to connect to Alvarez's work.

That doesn't seem like a bad thing. Seems like central to the point of this community, no?

I was thinking the same thing -- if I ran across that, in a book, not knowing anything else about the book or the author, I would assume that a monolingual-English audience was not the target audience for the book, and that if I wanted to read & understand, I would need to keep a dictionary at hand or Babelfish open.

Well put.

I circled phrases and words I didn't know as I read the book and afterwards looked them all up. There were only two or three that I couldn't find easily through Google. I should have mentioned that in the original post, and that my biggest complaint was still a very minor frustration.

Once Upon a Quinceanera: Coming of Age in the USA by Julia Alvarez

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject