Week 2 - Cartucho: Tales of the Struggle in Northern Mexico - Nicholas Latimer - On Childhood, Memory, and Regression
Cartucho was a very raw, vulgar, yet equally thought-provoking read. Flipping through each miniature recollection, I kept waiting for context - captivated by each scene in its own way - all the way to finishing the book and realizing that perhaps the context of these short stories was mindfully absent. Of course, leaving out an explanation of where we were at any given moment, what each character was truly fighting for, or where we even ended up - was impactful enough to make readers feel grateful for the completeness of the narrative of their own life - or at least in their other readings. The uncut and strung-together haphazardly series of stories gave me some kind of a manic feeling that everyone in the northern town must have been dealing with throughout the entire period.
Most similar to our previous course reading, this narrative was also given from a childhood perspective. Although, as I’ve discussed with classmates already - a key difference between Campobello and Mama Blanca’s Memoirs child storyteller is that while the latter exhibits somewhat of a day-dream back to the good ol’ days type of energy - here we are presented with the destruction of an otherwise innocent town and vulnerable child's livelihood - as they recount the tragedies and normalized-atrocities she experienced in her youth.
However, to make things more complicated - we learn in lecture that Campobello was in fact a teenager at the time of these happenings, and has decided to recount the events from the perspective mentioned before.
Why?
My initial thought was to the popular Freudian defense mechanism - regression - whereby people who are attempting to cope may temporarily revert to an earlier mental stage of development - as a means to avoid addressing one’s feelings honestly and maturely. Moreover, as we ask the question of why she wrote from a childs perspective - someone of this perspective might prefer to ask why did she experience these events from a “childhood level of development” for which lots can be said explaining how this may have helped her avoid intense feelings of anger & need for retaliation in clashes with a fear of invasion or even death. This could arguably be seen when she recounts General Alfredo Rueda Quijano’s assassination by ‘pistols of her childhood’ ‘because he was bad to mama’ - suggesting that although this event occurred later in her life - mentally she envisioned retribution for her childhood imagination.
In the story of Felipe Angeles, Campobello admits to recounting only what “impressed” her the most, and not what she did not understand. Given that she is writing based on teenage memories, from the perspective of her childhood - what does this statement actually say about what she chose to share? For example: Are we being told what teenage Campobello recalls, or merely what Campobello feels she would have recalled as her childhood self?
"a key difference between Campobello and Mama Blanca’s Memoirs child storyteller is that while the latter exhibits somewhat of a day-dream back to the good ol’ days type of energy"
ReplyDeleteExcept that I think that in some ways, for Campobello these *were* the "good ol' days." As I suggest in my lecture, there's something about the Revolution--specifically, Villa and his men--that she wants to rescue, that she thinks (as Mama Blanca things of Cochocho et al) shouldn't simply be forgotten, buried by the "official story" that simply calls them bandits.
Oh, and your labels seem to have run together to become one enormous label that says "Childhood Regression Freud Mama Blanca Campobello Memory Imagination." These are great, but you need to find a way to split them up!
ReplyDeleteHi there!
ReplyDeleteI too wondered why Campobello chose to take on the perspective of a child in order to write this book. I think that it's evident in the way she writes that the narrator only choses to focus on elements a child would notice. I think this may attribute to why there is little context provided within each story or even within the time period itself. I think this may have been because historical context or figures were not something that the narrator as a child would focus on, a child would focus on the violence, the gore and the pain they witnessed, and I think this speaks to what Campobello wanted to focus on. Stories and historical descriptions of the revolution have been told before, however nothing can quite capture the reality of this time the way a child can. A child often has a perspective of the world that has less influence, social cues or stereotypes, but rather focuses on what is right in front of them. I think it's possible Campobello choice to revert to a child narration was to attempt tell the story of the revolution from a more unique and raw perspective, a perspective much like that of the children and people who actually lived through this time.
Hi Nicholas! My view on the lack of context could be attributed to the stories being told from the perspective of a child, and I do not typically associate children as feeling obligated to provide extra context for others to understand their perspective. I believe it is not until early teenage years that children gain the ability to perceive the external experiences of their surrounding world, and until then, their own personal experience is the 'sole experience' that is given any consideration. So that being said even though they are teenage memories, to honour the intentions of the stories being told from that of a child the focus is on the storytelling, rather than the details provided (as a teenager may be capable of doing). I do find your point interesting that the reality of daily life was embedded with chaos and uncertainty and that was something likely mirrored in the other residents and a commonality between them.
ReplyDeleteTo answer your question, I do believe she recounted these events as if her childhood self experienced them. With enough personal reflection and awareness, I feel as though it would be possible to imagine how your younger self would experience "present" (past) experiences.