Q: One Hundred Years of Solitude is a vastly ambitious book, attempting to bridge many dualisms and appeal to many audiences: it is both general and particular, both realistic and magical. Is the book successful in its attempts to encompass such a vast scope of experiences and voices? What are the narrative shortcomings of One Hundred Years of Solitude?
A: The book is successful in encompassing so many generations of people in a neat organized way. With so many characters, plot twists, time gaps etc. no author could’ve done it better than Garcia. Readers are often confused as to who the characters are (their names are often too similar to really tell the difference), yet the main themes of the book are carried out well. Whether that’s a short-coming of the novel or an effective element is left for interpretation. Personally, I think the idea of the book is incredible – the fantasy and the reality add on to each other’s magnificence (or darkness at times), but clarity should’ve been present throughout the book to add to its effectiveness. If he distinguished the generations more without intertwining them, the characters would form their own individuality without morphing into each other.
Q: With which character in One Hundred Years of Solitude do you most identify? Why? Is there any character in the novel who is wholly admirable, anyone who is wholly evil?
A: I don’t identify with any of the characters in 100 Years Of Solitude. They’re all extremists and unstable in their own ways, which separates us on a mental and emotional level. I think their transparent innocence, especially in the beginning of the book, is almost impossible to feel in today’s society. On another note, Melquaides proves himself to be the most admirable character. His passionate desire for knowledge, ability to introduce ideas to people, and his honesty in doing so is rare. Not only does he bestow people with the gift of knowledge that comes from outside their isolated...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document