AP Literature: Everything is Illuminated discussion

Everytime I read the letters Alex writes to Jonathan and he comments about editing what he is writing of what happened during the search for Augustine and Trechimbrod, and suggesting editing for what Jonathan is writing about the past makes me wonder about the reliability of their writings. The way to know what happened in the story is through the writings Jonathan is doing about the Safran's history and the narrations Alex does about the heritage search. The fact that in the letters Alex often mentions making changes to both writings makes me wonder how true these stories are. It seems to me that they are writing freely how they wanted the stories to be rather than what actually happened. Hence, I am really intrigued about how reliable both stories are because if they are more invented than factual, then what really happened? What would be the real story of what the book is about?
-APB3 Camila Vásquez

Cami, I think that you're completely correct. The fact that they make corrections to each others's texts, like when Alex had written something about his frist impression of Jonathan (something related to height I think) and then Jonathan asked him to eliminate that. Then, if we would've read the corrected version of the story (where Alex had already erased what Jonathan told him to) we would've never known that Alex was taller than Jonathan. These are the little details that start making us wonder whether or not these stories are factual. Perhaps we will understand more of the story's reliability as we advance in our reading (I hope).
--Mariana Velásquez Toro

As everyone knows, Alex is recounting the story of their search in Ukraine. They want to find Augustine in order to investigate her roll in Jonathan’s grandfather’s life. They meet this mysterious old woman in the fields who claims to know the people in the picture that Jonathan has. She lives in a humble house, which is near Trachimbrod. Her house is full of boxes that are labeled with different names. She cooked for them and started to recount her experiences to them and the things that she did when she was young, before the war. I didn’t understand why did Alex’s grandfather called her liar when she said something or the way he insulted her when she was talking, as if he didn’t want to listen to her or maybe she wasn’t recounting the real things that occurred. Then Alex’s grandfather told them that he wanted to speak to her alone, so Jonathan and Alex went outside of the house and waited until they finished talking. What did they talk about and why couldn’t Alex or Jonathan listen to their conversation? I find it very strange because throughout the story, everyone tells the story through their point of view, so readers would never know if the characters are actually writing the things that really happen or they are just making up the stories.

APB2
Valentina Balcazar

I wouldn't ´t agree more with all of you. Its very hard for the reader to figure out what has happened and what has not because all of the characters have their own view of the world and they always shake things up a bit which confuses all of us. As for me, Alex is the winner. All throughout the book he has been my favorite character because of his humor, language, and attitude. However I cannot really tell when he is telling the truth and when he is not. This troubles me and it shocked me when i read that Alex has not had any real sexual experience before when at the begging of the book all he talked about was how girls wanted to get "carnal" with him. To me, this is another of the genius strategies that the author uses to confuse the reader, and to clarify things as well. The letters lets us know when there are some small lies and we discover them and as we do, it makes us wonder what else would be a lie, yet Jonathan (the author) selectively decided which lies to uncover so that the story would be clear to the reader and yet suspicious. I actually enjoy this type of writing because Im able to make my own conclusions of which parts were untrue and which parts were real. However, I am certain that if were something important to the author, he would make sure that the reader will find out sooner or later.

APB3 - Manuela Restrepo

Camila wrote: "Everytime I read the letters Alex writes to Jonathan and he comments about editing what he is writing of what happened during the search for Augustine and Trechimbrod, and suggesting editing for wh..."
I think this is specially true specially when we talk about Alex. It becomes clear throughout the book that the original description we got of Alex is somewhat wrong. Alex describes himself like he wants to be and not like he really is. We become aware of this when he confeses to Jonathan that he doesnt have any sexual experience. This is compleately contrary to what we knew about him which was that he was a ladysman. This shows that it is better not to trust what all the character tell us but to analyze the story better its essential to compare what all the characters have told us in order to uncover the truth.
Maria Luisa Angel

We all know that the story is hard, complicated, complex, and mixed up. I think that is parcially why we like it so much. I agree with Manuela because she mentions the fact that Jonathan will uncover the truths that are important for the text. If i dont know something its because the author decided that it is not important enough for me to know. There are certain things in the story which are lies and the reader has to figure it out throughout the story. This left me in doubt about some of the characters and how they truly are. Alex is an example because he has said many things about himself that are not necessarily true. Like mariana said, there are some things that Jonathan asked Alex to correct in the translations that are not entirely incorrect but they are not completly true either. There are many things that I´m confused about know because i dont know if i should consider them as truth or as lie. I think that the story is about not trusting anyone and experimenting with what you have before you take sides. Both characters think differently and they act differently and they express themselves differently in the novel. Their points of view are different and it is ok that their stories are different as well, I think that they just want to make themselves more interesting and more appealing to the public, but over all I think that we have to open our eyes and look carefully before we like a person ( alex ) based on what we hear (because he says he is popular with girls) but we should base it on experience, after really digging into his story and learning more about the person.
-Laura Agudelo

I really think that most of the stories in the book are part of the fiction that makes it more interesting . I think that most of Jonathan's stories and most of what Alex says is not true because of the tone they use that is a little unbelievable but I think that this is one of the aspects that makes the stories so much fun to read. I think that the authors purpose was to create an illusion that both authors were improving and that they were both creating something great .I think that the fact that Jonathan is always correcting what Alex says is a bit ironic because Jonathan's stories are very ridiculous and they are really fictional and fantastic.
Daniela Arango

One of the things being explored in the novel is what is truth when it comes to storytelling? Is truth what happened, or is truth the way you remember it? What if two memories conflict? Whose "truth" is given more credit. We're constantly assessing truth, but frequently what we conclude is truth has much more to do with who's telling the story than it does with the story itself.

I think all the stories are not at all reliable but is part of the fiction of the book. but is really interesting the stories and i think that the creativity of the book makes the reader want to read more and more maybe because even thought the stories may be seen as awkward they are really funny. an example is the story about Lista that is a story that in some way is true but most of it is made up by Jonathan.

I love the stories of the grand father it is the most interesting part of the book. It gives me an interesting point of view. He has the life that most teenager boys would dream with.An active sexual life at a very young age. Even though he has an atribute that most will make a great deal about he manages to keep his cool with the deal that he has Something that many would kill for. He has an admirable way of maneging his situation

Mariana Calle APB2

I think the importance of truth and the reliability of announced truths is relative when it comes to the purpose of that truth. For Jonathan, it's a lot more important that there's veracity to every story they hear, to Augustine's memories since he wants to uncover mysteries from his family and his own past. But in reality, many times when we hear truths we only acknowledge parts that are included in what we were expecting to hear. Many times, it doesn't matter that stories are actually true but when we like them or find them interesting we accept them as truths. In various cases, we repeat those stories to other people, and we use techniques, hyperbolizing, throwing in flashbacks, giving unnecessary suspense, using symbols and metaphors (for example the girl being born in the middle of an accident in the river is surely not what ACTUALLY happened, but the product of many years of the story going from one generation to the next until it becomes legend-like) all of which enhance the story telling, making it more enjoyable. Not only do these 'literary devices' make most stories more interesting, but they make them every time less reliable. I don't know if any of you have watched a Tim Burton movie called "Big Fish", but this topic of 'Reliability of the story makes me think of it, in the movie the main character's dad has never told him the truth about anything, he makes up fun and impossible stories for when he was born, when he tells his son about his childhood and even stories about how his death will be an adventure as well. And I think when it comes to life, it would be a lot more fun not to think of the exact, objective details of every story, but try to turn it into something a bit more entertaining. Alex does a good job at this as he describes himself, for instance, and the book itself has a great approach to what I think 'ideal' story telling would be like, mainly fantastic and unreliable. It also adds more mystery and engages the reader more.
-Manuela Navarro APB1