As I finished the book I came to a realization everyone is looking for the “water to their chocolate,” the “peanut butter to their jelly,” or as my friends know I would say: the “beer to my cigarette.” Tita says Pedro was the water to her chocolate when they got in a fight. She was on the verge of boiling over and going crazy which is what water literally does for chocolate. Love is such a crazy thing and there are all different ways to interpret it but when it comes to romantic love I am just searching for my “water.” I think sometimes we look for the “boiling point” in our counterpart. We want someone to drive us crazy and boil us over just so he or she can calm us down and bring us to a simmer.
Tita and Pedro had this star crossed love affair that had to be hidden from others for twenty years. At times in the book I found myself believing that Pedro was being such a dick and so selfish and I believed Tita could be stupid and childish. Although this book seemed like a mystical fairytale at times, it leads me to believe that things happen for a reason. I have always believed that there are times when the stars align and lead us to where we are supposed to be. For example in the book, characters had to die; others had to come into Tita’s life just to lead her to the union of her and Pedro. After all the trials and recipes they had to go through together they managed to keep their love burning.
One thing I found interesting is this sense of “boiling over” transcended to all relationships. Tita’s mother was an evil witch who kept Tita unhappy for so long. She made Tita’s blood boil until finally she escaped and lived with the doctor. Another example is the relationship of Pedro and Rosaura. It infuriated Tita but she stood by and watched them live a lie for a few years and even watched them build a family until one day she couldn’t take it anymore.
Something I found intriguing about the book was food being a critical character in the book. Tita put her heart and soul into her food and everyone around her seemed to pick up on that. She was devastated when she was baking a cake for Rosaura’s wedding. Whether it was bad eggs or her emotions, all the guests got violently ill from eating the cake. When Tita’s mother was left paralyzed she made her soup. Because the mother refused to eat it, she in essence killed herself from the lack of nutrition. It was one less thing standing in the way of her and the love she has always longed for.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Sunday, April 12, 2009
"Love" Lockdown
After reading the novel, "Love" it is apparent to me that Toni Morrison is not a woman of few words. Her writing although fluid, is decorated with lavish words. Her wording adds almost a "perfume-ity" to the story. This only leads me to believe that the narrator, "L" is an observer. She recognizes her surroundings and picks up on the types of relationships all these women have with Mr. Cosey. One of the relationships I find odd is that of Heed and Christine. Christine seems to have this inner hate and resentment for her step grandmother, yet remains in the same house at her. When Junior arrives I expected Heed to be this mean old woman when in fact she opens up her house to this runaway. I liked that Heed wasn't what I expected because it showed depth of character. Another thing I liked about the book was that it was not a typical love story. There were no white horses or candle light dinners. But the book displayed real love. The kind they don't show in movies or tv. The love these women received from this men wasn't perfect, at times it didn't even seem sensible to be in love with Cosey. I liked how the book showed love not only in a romantic way or how it is always displayed, but it was evident in every relationship. Between husband and wife, father and child, friend to friend.
The one thing I took from "Love" was the idea that it is not what you do in life but the mark you make on others while you're living. Death is a scary, lonely idea. I'm not sure what happens when you die. I'm not even sure I could concoct the perfect heaven or after life. I do know that life continues on without us. The only thing left of us is the "love" we shared with others and how they view us once we are gone. Although I didn't necessarily love "Love" I think Morrison did a great job of expressing the idea that we truly leave footprints in the hearts of others once we pass. The characters still held onto the feelings they had for Cosey when he was alive and whether it was negative or positive; it was love. Which everyone can attest to, is never perfect.
The one thing I took from "Love" was the idea that it is not what you do in life but the mark you make on others while you're living. Death is a scary, lonely idea. I'm not sure what happens when you die. I'm not even sure I could concoct the perfect heaven or after life. I do know that life continues on without us. The only thing left of us is the "love" we shared with others and how they view us once we are gone. Although I didn't necessarily love "Love" I think Morrison did a great job of expressing the idea that we truly leave footprints in the hearts of others once we pass. The characters still held onto the feelings they had for Cosey when he was alive and whether it was negative or positive; it was love. Which everyone can attest to, is never perfect.
Sunday, April 5, 2009
God is NOT a woman!
After reading “The Myth of the Vaginal Orgasm,” I have come to terms that our maker did not come with feminine parts. I believe Koedt was trying to disprove the vaginal orgasm and bring to light the woman’s role in sexual relationships. She referenced Freud when speaking of “frigid” women or women that could not achieve an orgasm during intercourse. I would like to say thank you Freud for comparing my vagina to an ice storm in Antarctica. A quote from the article that sticks in my mind is that ‘women are defined sexually by pleasing men.’ Women and men have been having sex for thousands of years and only recently has the importance of the female orgasm been appreciated. Sex is a partnership that should be important to both sexes. The article was written almost forty years ago and I do believe since then there has been a female sexual revolution.
This leads me to my own personal thesis statement: God is not a woman. The evidence has been staring women in the face for years. If the cold uncomfortable duck clamps at the gynecologist did not get the point across maybe it is the hundreds of dollars spent on tampons year after year or the joy of pushing a baby the size of a watermelon out of our vaginas. On top of all that we are faced with the reality that a vaginal orgasm may not exist. If that is not a “kick us when we’re down” moment, I do not know what is. When it comes to sex, men are like machines. You turn them on, they perform the task, and then you shut them off when you are done. Men are too easy because they know what they like. A woman does not exactly have to do circus tricks to turn him on. When it comes to women orgasms take time, they take concentrations, and sometimes they even take tequila. In that respect, I slightly agree with Freud when says frigid women need some sort of help in achieving an orgasm.
Whatever it is I feel roles have changed slightly in the past. Men have changed this idea of not only being confident because he has had sex with a woman but wanting assurance that he can get a woman to orgasm. I believe that since that article was written men have strived to be better lovers and women have become more sexually expressive. However, my theory definitely does not apply to all men and women!
This leads me to my own personal thesis statement: God is not a woman. The evidence has been staring women in the face for years. If the cold uncomfortable duck clamps at the gynecologist did not get the point across maybe it is the hundreds of dollars spent on tampons year after year or the joy of pushing a baby the size of a watermelon out of our vaginas. On top of all that we are faced with the reality that a vaginal orgasm may not exist. If that is not a “kick us when we’re down” moment, I do not know what is. When it comes to sex, men are like machines. You turn them on, they perform the task, and then you shut them off when you are done. Men are too easy because they know what they like. A woman does not exactly have to do circus tricks to turn him on. When it comes to women orgasms take time, they take concentrations, and sometimes they even take tequila. In that respect, I slightly agree with Freud when says frigid women need some sort of help in achieving an orgasm.
Whatever it is I feel roles have changed slightly in the past. Men have changed this idea of not only being confident because he has had sex with a woman but wanting assurance that he can get a woman to orgasm. I believe that since that article was written men have strived to be better lovers and women have become more sexually expressive. However, my theory definitely does not apply to all men and women!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)