Showing posts with label How the Garcia Girls Lost Their Accents. Show all posts
Showing posts with label How the Garcia Girls Lost Their Accents. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 19, 2016

Yolanda's Central Violation

"I identify myself in language, but only after losing myself in it like an object. What is realized in my history is not the past definitive of what it was, since it is no more, or even the present perfect of what has been in what I am, but the future anterior of what I shall have been for what I am in the process of becoming"--Lacan

In Julia Alvarez' How the Garcia Girls Lost their Accents, Yolanda (the central character) struggles with "losing [her]self in [language] like an object."  Her lover, John's, words seem like "babble" to her, just as her words fail her when trying to establish a loving connection that is not physical (78).  The above quote from Lacan (mind numbing as it is!) simultaneously points to both the future and past--the "future anterior"-- as Joseph Bristow illustrates, to provide "a projective tense that looks in anticipation to both the past and future, to what one will have been and to what one is going to become."

To get a better understanding of this, it helps to quote the first part of Lacan's notion of the "I" in language (and communication in general): "What I see in speech is the response of the other.What constitutes me as subject is my question. In order to be recognized by the other, I utter what was only in view of what will be. In order to find him, I utter a name that he must assume or refuse in order to reply to me."  

Yolanda clearly does not enjoy being called by her various nicknames, especially the Americanized Joe:  "Ay, Yolanda. Her mother pronounced her name in Spanish, her pure, mouth-filling, full-blooded name, Yolanda. But then, it was inevitable, like gravity, like night and day, little apple-bites when God's back is turned, her name fell, bastardized, breaking into a half dozen nicknames—'pobrecita Yosita'—another nickname" (81).  Yolanda has essentially refused to respond to John, as he does not provide her with the recognition she so direly needs: "She could not make out his words....they meant nothing to her. What are you trying to say? she kept asking. He spoke kindly, but in a language she had never heard before" (77).  "The proudly monolingual" John's words are hollow; he equates Yolanda's identity crisis with craziness, the former worsening as a result of the couple's failed relationship, as well as the failure of Yolanda's biggest crutch, words (73).   

Yolanda's fragmented nature, characteristic of all four Garcia sisters, divided between "poet" and "writer-slash-teacher," Dominican and American, Spanish and English, etc., is reflected by the reverse chronology of the narrative.  She must collapse time "to fit in what's left in the hollow of [her] story" (289).  Unraveling time in search of the traumatic event that haunts her dreams--with anticipation of what [she] will have been to what [she] is going to become--Yolanda (re)discovers--as an adult writing her own tale--her cruel act of torturing and maiming a kitten as a child.  The act of creatively relaying her pain via creative literature (yes, I'm saying Yolanda is a shadow of Garcia!), helps Yolanda discover "the violation that lies at the center of [her] art" (290),  terrible pasts, repressed memories, etc., that we all must face in order to seek recognition in ourselves.  Also, the so called "violation" could be a playful nudge by Garcia, meaning that of tampering with the so-called immutable, unified force of inevitability--time.

   

Monday, January 18, 2016

Feminism in Time, Dialogue, and Structure in "How the Garcia Girls Lost Their Accents"

          Although there are many thematic elements within How the Garcia Girls Lost their Accents, one of the most prominent is the use of feminist language, elements, and motifs. It is impossible to deny that the novel is absolutely laden with their use, and it is certain that author Julia Alvarez used it for a reason. It is also impossible to hide the fact that made sure to incorporate her understanding and ideals of feminism and, in the most basic understand, what it means to "be a woman." Alvarez uses linear breaks (incorporated into her reverse-linear timeline) and character focus to demonstrate the changing "womanhood" of the four daughters both as individuals and collectively as a family. As time moves backward (and the novel moves forward), the sisters gradually gain and lose their independence as women both from their family and the people around them. The reader begins to know more about the women as the novel progresses, even though the women (linearly) know less and less about themselves; although the characters are regressing in age, knowledge, and language, they become more and more complex (although they may not understand it yet).

          Right from the start, the four women (well into adulthood) are treated and referred to simply as "girls" or more specifically "the girls" and "you girls." During her visit to the "old country," Yolanda endures extreme sexism, cultural ideologies, and hidden resentment from her extended family (more specifically, her aunts and female cousins). Her aunt, Tia Flor, right away starts the barrage during her visit, stating "It's not good... you four girls get lost up here... So how are you four girls?" (7). Right away, Yolanda and her sisters have their individual identities stripped from them by their own flesh and blood, but they also have their adulthood and womanhood stripped from them. The four are referred to simply as "you four girls" rather than Yolanda as "you" herself or the sisters as "your four women" or even simply "you four sisters." Even when Yolanda notes she can look after herself and take public transit, the aunts and cousins scold and laugh at her, stating, "Can't you see it?!... Yoyo climbing into an old camioneta with all the campesinos and their fighting cocks and their goats and their pigs!" which is followed simply by the words "Giggles and head shakings." (9-10). Yolanda, a grown woman, is laughed down by her own aunts and cousins simply for the sake of trying to be an independent, strong woman that she has always tried to be growing up (a fact we, the readers, will find out later in the novel). This same sexist, anti-feminist sentiment is echoed by the guards in the area who hurt a boy, Jose, who they believed were lying to them about what he was doing, stating that "The guardia hit me. He said I was telling stories. No dominicana with a car would be out at this hour getting guayabas" (22). It is so unbelievable in the Dominican Republic that a woman would (or even could) go out by herself when she wanted to do anything, let alone "get guayabas" that a guard hits a child for thinking he was lying.

          This same set of old-world ideals and patriarchal sexism is also echoed later in the novel (albeit earlier in the Garcia girls' lives) when Sofia (nicknamed Fifi) begins a relationship with a distant, illegitimate cousin named Manuel Gustavo. Manuel, like the rest of the men the reader has seen in the Dominican Republic, is centered around machismo and ideals of male superiority. Although his father is actually Tio Orlando's illegitimate son, a different uncle, Ignacio, instead takes responsibility for him because "he's never married and is always getting ragged about being homosexual. So two men are off the hook with one bastard" (119). Machismo and heterosexuality are revered to the point that a man (who may or may not be homosexual) will take responsibility for some other man's infidelity rather than be thought of as homosexual. And to top it all off, it is noted that "According to Fifi, the alta sociedad, the high-class ladies of the oligarchy who form a kind of club, not unlike a country club, are delighted by this juicy bit of gossip" (119). This mention by the narrator (Yolanda) calls back to the age-old commentary of the "gossiping woman." This commentary has been in major works of literature for multiple centuries, including works of Chaucer (the Wife of Bath in The Canterbury Tales), Eliot (Mrs. Cadwallader in Middlemarch), or Atwood (the Marthas in The Handmaid's Tale).

          Even the sexuality of femininity becomes a major factor for the sisters and, most importantly, for Yolanda, the narrator, who can give a first-hand account of her own sexual awakening / discovery, one that is individual and unique to her (rather than her and her sisters being lumped together once again). This femininity and sexual awakening goes hand and hand with her upbringing and the cultural ideologies that come with it. During her courtship with Rudy (aka Rudolph Brodermann Elmenhurst, the third), Yolanda begins to discover what she is (and more importantly what she isn't) comfortable with in a relationship. She begins to hate or even loathe her own ideals and upbringing for the fact that she couldn't be a "typical American teenager (95). Trying to fit in, she seemingly curses her own existence for the fact that she can't be who or what Rudy (or any other "college man") wants in a relationship without going against her own ideals. She is so in love with Rudy that she can't let herself realize what kind of man he was, even though she gives her own commentary that she "would drink only a sip or two of the Dixie cup he offered, and [she] wouldn't dare touch the drugs. [She] was less afraid of what they would do to my mind than [she] was of what Rudy might do to [her] body while [she] was under the influence" (95). Although this narrative is being given from a presumably later date, one must consider the importance of Yolanda's own understanding of the situation (even if understood later in life). Yolanda is willing to go against her ideals and push her own limits, but only at her own discretion; she is not willing under any circumstance to allow herself to be put into a position to do something she isn't willing to do. This is absolutely important to Yolanda's personal growth and development mentally and sexually, both as an adult and a woman. This growth is expanded upon further when Rudy attempts to once again make his way into Yolanda's life. This time, however Yolanda doesn't leave, hoping he would chase him. Instead, Yolanda throws him out, noting, "Catholic or not, I still thought it a sin for a guy to just barge in five years later with a bottle of expensive wine and assume you'd drink out of his hand. A guy who had ditched me, who had haunted my sexual awakening with a nightmare of self-doubt" (103). This chapter focusing on her sexual and romantic growth comes after a chapter in which she talks of her marriage with a different man, John. Although her relationship with John comes chronologically after her relationship with Rudy, it isn't until the chapter with Rudy (earlier in her life chronologically) that the reader begins to understand the complexity of Yolanda's character. The chapter with John instead focuses on a more poetic love, a "typical" love, one she is looking for with Rudy but doesn't receive in return.

          Even when she was young, Yolanda had "girliness" and femininity and cultural ideals pushed onto her. With her cousin Mundin, Yolanda would often play and do things that would be considered "not lady-like," such as playing like they were in the "old West" as cowboy and cowgirl (225). This femininity was, for the most part, ignored and spoiled by her grandmother. She notes, "My American cowgirl outfit was an exact duplicate--except for the skirt--of Mundin's cowboy one." When her mother disapproved, thinking it would lend to her being a "tomboy," Yolanda uses the logic that is presented to her. Even though it was a copy of a cowboy outfit, it included a skirt. She points out, "But it is for girls... Boys don't wear skirts" (228). This amuses her grandmother because Yolanda has simply used the basic, imposed understanding of "girls wear skirts, boys don't" to argue her mother's worries. Yolanda is correct, showing that even at an early age she has a complex understanding of the world she lives in even though she has very simple ideologies placed on her early in her life. This complex understanding comes to Yolanda early chronologically but is shown to the reader near the end of the novel's own narrative. One must question why Alvarez structured the entire novel this way. It would seem to make more sense to narrative structure that the complex character be presented after the complexity has been reached or developed, chronologically later (earlier in the novel), but instead Alvarez presents it in the complete reverse. As the sisters' age gradually decreases throughout the novel, their complexity and self-understanding increases. This motif correlates directly to the ending of Atwood's Happy Endings, stating "That's about all that can be said for plots, which anyway are just one thing after another, a what and a what and a what. Now try How and Why." While the novel can be placed chronologically A to Z with the complexity of characters and plot gradually increasing through the novel, much can be said for the reversal. For example we learn about Yolanda's want and need for a poetic type of love, a love that is grounded in her ideals and her passions, a major plot point. But it isn't until the chapter following that we learn why Yolanda is the way she is in her relationship with John or how she got to be that way.

How the Garcia Girls Found their Identities



How the Garcia Girls Found their Identities
            Throughout her novel How the Garcia Girls Lost their Accents, Julia Alvarez uses a reverse chronological timeline, coupled with a variety of narrative techniques to show how time and experience affected each of the Garcia girls to create individualized personalities. Carla, Sandra, Yolanda, and Sofia are the different products of very similar lives that due to their interpretation of time resulted in four unique perspectives.

            When a reader picks up a book, it’s common to expect that the story will start at the beginning and at the end, all the mysteries will be revealed. In How the Garcia Girls Lost their Accents, that isn’t the case. As the audience, we are given the end point. The first experience we share in is Yolanda’s return to the Dominican Republic after a long time away. Slowly, we begin to realize that this isn’t a casual vacation. Yolanda feels disconnected from what we learn to be her roots and yet, she feels them calling to her: “when she returns to the States, she’ll find herself suddenly going blank over some word in English or, like her mother, mixing up some common phrase. This time, however, Yolanda is not so sure she’ll be going back,” (Alvarez 7). It would usually be safe to assume that the plot would move forward from this point with the occasional flash back or back story explanation and end with Yolanda’s decision on whether to stay or not. Instead, we’re thrown into a scene in the not so distant past and are left wondering what to make of the antojos that Yolanda worked so hard to find.
            Slowly, we piece together not only the life of Yolanda, but also the lives of her three sisters. As we work our way through their experiences in both the United States and the Dominican Republic, we wonder where it is that the novel will lead us. What is the singular catalyst that sent the Garcia Girls on their journeys to self-actualization, if we can call the moment of introduction that? Instead of building character development, Alvarez sends us on a journey to deconstruct one scenario after another to make sense of the girls’ identities. This reversal of the traditional timeline really forces us as readers to ask “what happened first?” instead of  “what happens next?” We shift our focus from the anticipation of the grand finale that we have been trained to yearn for so desperately to the curiosity of how a character and a world is built and what that means. We look closer at how we connect with these characters and how we share or disagree with opinions of time and how it affects us.

            Part of how we experience the Garcias’ lives has to do with the narrative style with which each chapter is given. Throughout the novel, we see the different scenarios through third person narrative (she, her, they) or through first person narrative (I, we, us) with a fluctuating omniscient (all-knowing) aspect. There are times where we seem to be watching the Garcias lives their lives like they’re a TV series and then there are those when we see ourselves in their shoes. Though the amount of time that passed in each chapter varied, time seemed to go slower for me as I read the chapters that were in the first person narrative. These seemed to hold more weight and therefore take up more time while the third person chapters seemed to pass by quickly.
            For me, this difference in relative time had to do with the connections that were being made. Third person narrative chapters skimmed over (seemingly) common issue that any reader may be able to relate to if they were to pick up the novel (Yo loosing touch with her roots in “Antojos” for example) while giving them an immigration twist through the girls’ individual thoughts and experiences that come from an all-knowing narrator. These situations give broad senses that can be empathized with and therefore don’t need the same amount of attention as ones that deal strictly with personal experiences that need more relative (but maybe not literal) time. It is the chapters that deal with extreme cultural clashes that suck us in with the first person narrative so that we can sit and think through what these girls are feeling and why.
You can believe we sisters wailed and paled, whining to go home. We didn't feel we had the best the United States had to offer. We had only second-hand stuff, rental houses in one redneck Catholic neighborhood after another, clothes at Round Robin, a black and white TV afflicted with wavy lines. Cooped up in those little suburban houses, the rules were as strict as for Island girls, but there was no island to make up the difference. (Alvarez 107)
As the daughter of immigrants and a frequent visitor of my parents’ childhood homes, it is still difficult for me to fathom what the girls felt when they were thrust into a new world that had little in common with what they found familiar. I can imagine that as audiences become more and more detached from their immigrant roots, it gets harder to relate to this feeling and so we must pay closer attention. For this reason, Julia Alvarez uses a collective first person narrative in “A Regular Revolution” to thrust readers into the minds of all four girls at once. Because we are not as comfortable with these situations (well, many of us aren’t as comfortable with this situation) we slow down; we take in each sentence and attempt to create a more vivid image that we can relate to.

Each individual “girl” goes through similar experiences as her sisters, but each one finds a different path for life. They all come from a warring country and move to a foreign land at a young age. They all experiment with American culture and get sent away to boarding school together. They all experiment with, struggle with, and find their sexual identities. They all feel pulled to one another in order to relive and validate their life experiences. What they don’t do is come out as copies of one another. Even from a young age, the timeline of the sisters’ personalities were mangled. “It gave solace to the third daughter, who was always tentative and terrified and had such troubles with men. Her sister’s breathing in the dark room was like having a powerful, tame animal at the foot of her bed ready to protect her,’ (Alvarez 29). Though Sofia was the youngest and therefore had spent the least amount of time experiencing life, she held herself with an air that could not be achieved by the older girls. She commanded the attention of all those around her and tore away from her roots more easily than her sisters. This is one example as to why Sofia’s experiences happen at a different relative pace than her sisters’. She was the one most easily acclimated to their new life due to the limited amount of time she spent on the island.

Every chapter has a different view on the time that the girls spent together and apart. They create their own realities and we as the audience are given only glimpses to construct our own reality and timeline for the girls. We are left to puzzle over why the Garcias ended up who they were at the beginning of the novel with little to no explanation in the end. We reach a point very near the beginning of the Garcia girls as a unitary identity but we are not necessarily given a specific point of reference to say that their story stemmed from.
Yolanda herself declares to the audience “you understand I am collapsing all time now so that it fits in what’s left in the hollow of my story?” (Alvarez 289) on the second to last page of the novel. Whether she is referencing the current jump through history or the novel as a whole, it is unclear to me. Is that not what we do for ourselves? Do we not collapse our own narratives into neat little chapters that define us? Alvarez forces us to become the Garcia girls through this interweaving of narrative styles and reverse chronological order. Through our experiences with them, we may just learn to better appreciate our own time, to recognize the importance of the past and the present, and to not worry so much about where we will end up because what are we if not a compilation of every moment we have experienced.


Alvarez, Julia. How the GarcĂ­a Girls Lost Their Accents. Chapel Hill, N.C.: Algonquin of
            Chapel Hill, 1991. Print.

How the Garcia Girls Lost Their Accents and Their Language and Their Identities in an Unraveling Narrative

How the Garcia Girls Lost Their Accents and Their Language and Their Identities in an Unraveling Narrative

            I frequently teach the chapters “Snow” and “Daughter of Invention” in high school English classes because those chapters are anthologized in our textbooks—“Snow” in the freshmen text’ “Daughter of Invention” in the junior text. I enjoy those chapters, so I choose years ago to read the novel. I remember enjoying the novel, as well. I keep a copy in my classroom library and frequently suggest it to students, usually juniors and seniors, who are ready for a novel that transitions well from young adult to adult literature. I don’t remember any student returning it with as enthusiastic reviews as I used when suggesting it. But I had not remembered the reverse order chronology. Nor the flashbacks within the chapters. Nor the changing third-person to first-person to four-girls-as-first-person-collective points of view. Nor the unresolved ending—beginning?—does Yolanda stay on the Island? Keeping track of the girls and the clues to the development of their 1989’s personas revealed in reverse order required two different sets of notes, which my high school students would not voluntarily take on as part of an independent reading book.
            Although the title emphasizes the Garcia girls’ accents, the narrative focuses more on the multifacets of language with accents as an aural cue to others that the girls will struggle with the language and, as a result, struggle to create a sense of identity. For example the opening chapter is set in the present—1989—and details third daughter Yolanda’s return trip to the Island. The third-person limited narrator explains that Yolanda’s language is in limbo: “In halting Spanish, Yolanda reports on her sisters. When she reverts to English, she is scolded, ‘¡En español!’The more she practices, the sooner she’ll be back into her native tongue, the aunts insist. Yes, and when she returns to the States, she’ll find herself suddenly going blank over some word in English” (7). To become American, it appears that Yolanda had to not lose only her accent but her native language, as well. And this creates a dichotomy—be fluent in Spanish or be fluent in English, but not both equally. This language limbo reveals a greater issue: is Yolanda Dominican or American? Although Yolanda and her sisters “used to shock their Island cousins with stories of their escapades in the States” (7), Yolanda now equates being American with “turbulent lives—so many husbands, homes, jobs, wrong turns among them” (11). This first chapter with its early revelations leaves the reader wanting to know more: what escapades? turbulent lives? wrong turns? How has Yolanda reached this point of romanticizing Island life: “But look at her cousins, women with households and authority in their voices. Let this turn out to be my home, Yolanda wishes” (11). Do the other girls feel the same way? To understand the 1989 identities, the reader needs to piece together the events and clues that appear during the unraveling that occurs in the reverse chronology; however, this creation of identity appears more obviously when the reader reorders the timelines to start in the girls’ childhoods to move forward in a traditional linear narrative.
            As children Mami dresses the girls “all alike in diminishing-sized, different color versions of what she wore” (40) so that each girl “had the same party dress, school clothes, underwear, toothbrush, bedspread, nightgown, plastic cup, towel, brush and comb set as the other three, but” Carla wore yellow, Sandra wore blue, Yolanda wore pink, and Sofia wore white. Mami also called them all by the same pet name, Cuquita (42) although it may have indicated “whoever was in her favor” (136). Years later Sofia, the youngest daughter, “claimed that the whole color system smacked of an assembly-line mentality,” while Carla, the eldest daughter who became a child psychologist, wrote “that the color system had weakened the four girls’ identity differentiation abilities and made them forever unclear about their personality boundaries” (41). The Garcia girls are viewed as a single entity that is reflected in the language used by others and themselves. In addition to the title, the group is referred to by family as “the cousins”; Mami “still calls them the four girls even though the youngest in twenty-six” (40); the Fannings, Papi’s benefactors in the States, linger over each girl “trying to get them straight” but resort to simply calling them “little beauties” (177; and numerous times they are referred to in the negative, “Four girls, no boys?” (57; 199). This lack of separate identity is most obvious in chapter six “A Regular Revolution” that is told in the first-person point of view of one of the sisters, but all four girls are referred to in the third-person; even the sisters, at times, see themselves as a collective noun. The language of others has created a sense of singular identity for the girls that is sometimes beneficial and sometimes stifling in its unity.
            Language is also power in the novel. When the dictator Trujillo comes to power, he is “jealous of anyone with education and money” (226) so to avoid being punished for having better language or for using language to speak out against Trujillo, Papita (Mami’s father; the girls’ maternal grandfather) takes a post at the United Nations in New York City (226-227). When the Garcias flee to New York City the parental identities flip as Mami “was the leader [because] [s]he had gone to school in the States. She spoke English without a heavy accent” (176) while Papi embarrassed by his lack of English, acted “like a servant” (180). Years later after Sofia gives birth to a son and the first male in two generations, Papi uses language to empower the infant: “You can be president, you were born here [. . .]. You can go to the moon, maybe even to Mars” without realizing that he disempowering his granddaughter who listens to him speaking to her brother (27).
            Language also disempowers. When Carla attends school in the next parish, she is harassed by a gang of boys who call her “spic,” “monkey legs,” and mimic her “Plees eh-stop” (153). Carla is ashamed of her changing body and feels that the “girl she had been back home in Spanish was being shed” (153). While walking home, Carla is approached by a man in a car; she is worried that she does not want to admit, “I don’t speak very much English” since she only knows “classroom English, a foreign language. She knew the neutral bland things to say” (156). But when she discovers that the man is a pervert, naked from the waist down, all language fails Carla: “Not one word, English or Spanish, occurred to her” (157). Carla’s lack of English leaves her powerless and a victim despite her previous identity as the eldest and most responsible.             Yolanda is disempowered in college and again during her marriage by her lack of language to understand, explore, and explain her emotions and her intimate needs. During her college relationship with Rudy, Yolanda explains that “[h]is vocabulary turned me off even as I was beginning to acknowledge my body’s pleasures. [. . .] But I didn’t want to just be in the sack, screwed, balled, laid and fucked my first time around with a man” (96-97). Ironically as an English major, Yolanda realizes that Rudy “had no sense of connotation in bed” (96). Although Yolanda is becoming aware of and welcoming toward her sexuality, her lack of language does not allow her to realize that Rudy wants an events not a relationship. Years later while dating, John wanted Yolanda to say that she loved him; Yolanda realizes the power of language because  “[o]nce they got started on words, there was no telling what they could say” (70). Unfortunately, John’s language hurts Yolanda when he changes her identity to “Joe” (71), “squirrel” (72), and “Violet after shrinking violet when she had started seeing [a therapist] Dr. Payne” (74). Yolanda recognizes “that just because they were different, that was no reason to make her feel crazy for being her own person” (73); unfortunately, Yolanda does not have the language to express that so she loses that ability to understand John (77-78) and then only communicates by reciting poetry (79). As she begins her recovery in a “small, private facility” (79), Yolanda discovers that she “has developed a random allergy to certain words” including alive and love (82), which eventually causes her to seek her identity on the Island.
            Sandi’s disempowerment due to lack of language comes from her inability to express herself artistically. The family attempts to encourage eight-year-old Sandi’s expression through drawing and painting through art lessons when they lived on the Island. However, the art teacher is an imposing woman “barking instructions in guttural Spanish which made you feel that you were mispronouncing your native tongue because you did not speak in her heavy German accent” (239). After being punished for not following directions, Sandi sneaks into the backyard eventually falling off a log and breaking her arm in three places (253). After a lengthy healing process, Sandi’s “cast was off. But I was a changed child. Months of pampering and the ridicule of my cousins had turned m inward. But now when the world filled me, I could no longer draw it out. I was sullen and dependent on my mother’s sole attention” (254). Sandi’s artistic language is reawakened a few years later at the floor show in New York City that the family attended with the Fannings: “Sandi’s heart soared. This wild and beautiful dance came from people like her, Spanish people, who dance the strange, disquieting joy that sometimes made Sandi squeeze Fif’s hand hard until she cried or bullfight Yoyo with a towel until both girls fell in a giggling, exhausted heap on the floor” (185). But, again, this language of artistic expression is ruined for Sandi. In this case by the drunk Mrs. Fanning scrambling onto the platform and dancing comically after Sandi had witnessed Mrs. Fanning earlier kiss Papi: “Mrs. Fanning had broken the spell of the wild and beautiful dancers” (186). This inability to express herself, and therefore find her identity, causes Sandi to take “a lot of drugs to keep her weight down” (47) followed by “a small breakdown” (51) in which Sandi believed that “[s]he was becoming a monkey” (54) because “[e]volution had reached its peak and was going backwards” (55). The stifling of Sandi’s language left her without an identity.
            Alvarez’s use of a reverse chronology causes the reader to ask questions first and look for the answers while reading the unraveling novel. While it would be easy to say that the simplest way to read the novel would be from end to beginning, the narrative is not linear in either direction. The flashbacks sprinkled throughout the vignettes add to the complexity of the nonlinear timeline. Regardless of the need to reread the novel to answer one’s questions, the novel, as focused by the title, examines how identity is created by language and expression, by lack of language and expression, and by the accumulating impact of language and expression.




Alvarez, Julia. How the Garcia Girls Lost Their Accents. New York: A Plume Book, 1992. Print.

Disrupting Circular Narrative Identity in Alvarez's "How the Garcia Girls Lost Their Accents"

In Julia Alvarez’s How the Garcia Girls Lost Their Accents, time is moving backward, yet the narrative is moving forward.  From the very first tale of Yolanda and the guavas, to each family member’s recollection of the guardias raids, the reader is gaining information and understanding the development of each character through what seems like a traditional linear narrative; however, as each chapter travels further backward into the lives of the Garcia girls and the nonlinear narrative is more obviously exposed, the chronological feel of the narrative progression is reluctant to slow down—each detail belongs to the beginning of the story, the present-tense, yet these same details are also threaded throughout the narrative during each chapter as they dip into the past.

The plurality of each character’s stories—the telling and retelling of events witnessed through a variety of perspectives, personalities, and phases—constructs a narrative identity throughout the novel. David Wood believes that narrative “links together history, literature, and biography with the fragments of self-understanding by which we come to understand ourselves and our lives in conversation with our friends” (22). If narrative acts as a link between these three key components, then narrative identity can be understood as the personality of story-telling and perspective that emerges from the linkage—not just the who or what of history, biography, and literature, but the who, what, when, where, and why of any given story in conversation not only with itself, but with other texts and their readers.

David Wood argues that “narrative identity stresses the intelligible organization of events at the expense of the will, the ethical moment, the moment of decision, of impetus” (32). The reader witnesses these expenses several times throughout the novel. For example, in “The Blood of the Conquistadores,” a single event is retold several times. Each retelling focuses more on the organization—the details of what is happening in a chronological manner—rather than focusing on the individual moments or emotions of each character. Although there is specific character-driven personality in each section, the chapter is strung together not by these individual retellings, but by the “intelligible organization” of the entire guardias event as a whole.

The reader can also witness similar moments throughout earlier sections of the book, where characters reference to another event or situation that has appeared in the novel’s past, yet still lingers the reader’s future through the nonlinear narrative. When characters discuss something like SofĂ®a’s relationship with Papi or Yolanda’s poetry, they are in conversation with each other, organizing the narrative events that will later unfold through the novel’s progression. Although the reader is able to distinguish the differences in opinion and personality regarding each character, character development is not necessarily chronological; instead, the development is circular—the past has determined the present, but because the reader cannot establish the details of the past, one must assume the present has, in some shape or form, also contributed to the past. As the narrative continues to progress, the circular narrative identity pattern widens, placing readers in opposition with themselves. Rather than each character representing a specific “ethical moment” or “moment of decision,” the characters, through the circular narrative of nonlinear time, become one.

 

Wood contends that “narrative does not just heal, it opens new rifts—first, the irresolvable plurality of stories, and then the opposition between the organizing power of imagination, on the one hand, and the will on the other (32). In other words, narrative exposes the reader to a variety of stories that are often impossible to distinguish, especially when dealing with narrative that utilizes both thought and action. Near the end of the novel, Yolanda breaks the narrative wall to ask the reader: “You understand that I am collapsing all time now so that it fits in what’s left in the hollow of my story?... I grew up, a curious woman, a woman of story ghosts and story devils” (289-90). Yolanda’s question comes after a retelling of the relationship with her kitten, a scene grounded in the past. Rather than ending the novel here, Yolanda’s inquiry thrusts the novel back into the present; however, there is no familiarity between the beginning of the book’s present and the concluding present confronting the reader.  

Yolanda’s question seems to function as both the “irresolvable plurality of stories” and the “opposition between the… power of imagination… and the will.” Yolanda is not only figuratively collapsing time, but as far as the timeline of the novel is concerned, she is also literally folding the stories inward.  The novel begins and ends with Yolanda—a further testament to the circular narrative identity pattern—and it becomes the reader’s task to understand the narrative morphing of each character’s specific stories rather than rely on Yolanda’s conclusion to determine what is happening. Once again, the narrative focuses on the organization of events, which Yolanda rehashes for nearly a page: “Then we moved to the United States. The cat disappeared altogether. I saw snow. I solved a riddle of an outdoors made mostly of concrete in New York. My grandmother grew so old she could not remember who she was” (289). Like the grandmother, the reader might have difficulty remembering the distinguishing qualities of each narrative thread and, as Laura always remarked, simply refer to one as something by “the four girls.”


Because Yolanda is collapsing time as a method of concluding the narrative, she is also collapsing the narrative itself. Time has been the foundation of each of the stories—moving forward, yet always moving backward—and the plurality of the stories, including the multiplicity of perspective, supports such a claim; however, by stepping outside of the narrative and informing the reader of her actions, Yolanda ends the narrative at the beginning.