On Paths Unknown discussion

Hi guys! A thread for discussing chapters 2, 3 and 4.

The Quail in Rose Petal Sauce looks divine! Yumyumyum. Now to find me a quail.... ;)

What do you guys make of the "whiteness" that Tita sees? It's obviously symbolic. It would be nice if we threw some ideas around on that.

Rose Petals steeped in blood, ahahaha!!!

The author was clearly trying to make a point about the whiteness. I'm not getting what exactly the whiteness means at this point. I've also never heard of the Catholic ceremony where girls dress in white and offer white flowers to the virgin. Virginity? Is that a ritual about virginity?

So her aunt Nacha was forced into the same servant status as Tita is. A family pattern. A family pattern of persecutors and victims.

Also, the paragraphs on the Chinaman getting rich during the war seemed angry and racist.

I love how the tears and blood magically affect everyone who eats them. That is a great metaphor for food. People always talk about how food is "made with love" implying that you will somehow ingest this love if you eat that sort of food. And I do feel like that about food. When my parents or husband cook for me I feel as if I am ingesting their love. I've also had instances where I felt repulsed by food made by people I didn't like.

This book is really reminding me of the movie Babette's Feast, one of my favorite movies.

And the ability to cook with beauty seems to signal the beauty of the character of the cook. Rosaura can't cook and this seemed to me to reflect her weakness of character and her shallow nature.

Loved the idea and images of Tita penetrating Pedro with her food.

Hi Michele, what a nice surprise to find all your comments here! Yes, I think the whiteness is possibly symbolic of virginity. Since she sees just white, Tita cannot escape the whiteness, just as she cannot now escape her virginity anymore.

As we saw earlier, the story takes place during the Mexican civil war. Before the civil war, Mexican society was very strict and patriarchal, and of course Roman Catholic. So once you got married, that was it - no divorce allowed.

In a way, therefore, Pedro's marriage to Rosaura was a death-knell for his and Tita's love, since not only Mama Elena, but societal structures and strictures as well, now stood in Tita's way of consummating her and Pedro's love.

Yes, I am feeling that cultural stricture as I read and how heartbreaking it is.

That rose petal recipe has got to be the raciest food I have even seen. Wow. The aftermath thereof just continues to highlight Mama Elena's selfishness, though. Her daughter has embarrassed her, and that can never be forgiven, of course; never mind that her poor daughter is likely living in misery! Ugh.

I get it, they're Catholic, and sex outside marriage for a woman is worse than murder, but Mama Elena's attitude suggests she takes everything personally, like she is the sun around which the whole world revolves, and anything distasteful which happens is something being done to her.

I'm finding I really like the magical realism. Roses being stained red by blood from Tita's bosom, Gertrudis actually setting the shower on fire, Tita's tears being so voluminous they interfere with a recipe---it's all absurd in a physical sense, and yet it's completely believable, because with love and tragedy so much larger than life, why not other things? I love it to bits.

Cultural rules or not, I've always thought that parents that get really wrapped up in their children's sex lives have something interesting going on in their own sex life. I've seen parents act like this and I just always say "what's up with your mom. Why is she so interested in your sex life?" Kinda weird. I'm thinking of how Mama hovers constantly to keep Tita and Pedro from having sex. Kinky!

I liked this passage and the passages that follow it:

She was not meant for the loser’s role. She would put on a triumphant expression. Like a great actress, she played her role with dignity, trying to think about anything but the wedding march and the priest’s words, the knot and the rings.

I really like how Tita refuses to be a "loser" and refuses to take on the "victim" role. She could so easily have done this, but she herself chooses how she is defined, despite being subjected to such an iron-fisted rule.

She is clearly a hero in this book. A genius, has great character, etc.

I noticed the Doctor thought the idea that Tita had to take care of her mother ridiculous, so that makes me doubt the importance of the "tradition" that Mama is citing.

I found chaps. 3 and 4 very hot in places. Like the naked Gertrudis riding off with the soldier and having sex while in a gallop. And then the scene where Tita is described in an erotic way grinding while Tito watches. The blurring of lines between having sex and cooking in that section were very good.

The doctor is American, though, Michele: his name is John Brown, clear neither Spanish nor native in origin.

I confess I'm finding the sexy bits very enjoyable, myself! ;)

It's curious, too, that despite being married and a father, Pedro is in a sense every bit a virgin as Tita: for him sex with his wife is an act without passion or love, just something mechanical (the impersonality of which is enhanced by the nuptual sheet) which is expected of him.

That his first sight of Tita's breasts was his first sight of any breasts was something I found very charming.

Michele wrote: "She is clearly a hero in this book. A genius, has great character, etc."

Hmmm, I think that maybe also, Mama Elena is symbolic of the old, repressive regime, (in Mexico) and the strict, traditional way of doing things, whereas Tita and Gertrudis might be symbolic of the revolution. (Let's chat more about Gertrudis in the next thread.)
Gertrudis and Tita just have different ways of rebelling, Gertrudis's way is obviously more direct, whereas Tita's way is more clandestinely subversive.

And talking of the next thread, it's here: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Ah, I didn't catch that the doctor was American.

Yes, all the breast-action in this section is very good. Tito watching Gertrudis' breasts as she runs naked.

I like that, Pedro is definitely still a virgin.

Hmm, on the one hand I think I can see why some feminists get their knickers in a tangle about this novel, because so far the only way presented for a woman to be, is very traditionally feminine, and what is more, the heroine or hero to quote Michele, acts so completely in keeping with the traditional ideal of femininity - you know, nursing (if not pregnant), barefoot and in the kitchen, and she even knits and sews, and also, we get told early on in the story that all that Tita ever wanted, was a husband and we do often get the idea that women are per se unfulfilled without a husband.

Of course there is nothing wrong with such women who revel in the 'feminine role', in fact, I think it's lovely. ...but it shouldn't be the only choice left open for women - that or prostitution, as if a woman's entire being and reason for being is bound up with her biology, which is basically, to serve men.

Things might change later on in the novel, but up to this point, I have started to feel increasingly uncomfortable with this. Granted, up to this point we still have the old regime and old traditions in place in Mexico, so maybe this is how a modern woman like myself -would- feel if I got transported back in time, back to 1910, when the only way for a woman to "make it" in life, was to snag herself a good marriage.

The other thing that is making me uncomfortable, is how nobody seems to think that the deal is unfair towards Rosaura as well. After all, the marriage was not her decision, but Mama Elena's decision.

And lastly, is it just me, or do the characters tend to feel a bit stereotypical and flat-ish? As in Mama is just evil, Tita is just good, ...and kinda actually, the set-up feels to me a bit like Cinderella, with Tita as Cinderella and Rosaura as the ugly stepsister, both vying for the affections of Prince Pedro.

Yes on all accounts. Although most of it doesn't really bother me, I just notice it. The book feels "old" to me so I am expecting people to act in unjust ways and then cite "tradition." I do notice the good vs. bad is overdone, but I don't mind having a bad character to despise sometimes.

The thing that really bothers me is that Tita doesn't just walk away or figure some way out instead of just taking it. This takes points off her heroic scorecard for me.

Puddin Pointy-Toes wrote: "I'm finding I really like the magical realism. Roses being stained red by blood from Tita's bosom, Gertrudis actually setting the shower on fire, Tita's tears being so voluminous they interfere with a recipe---it's all absurd in a physical sense, and yet it's completely believable, because with love and tragedy so much larger than life, why not other things? I love it to bits. ..."

I'm so glad that you actually like Magical Realism, Puddin, since I know this is your first taste of it, if I remember correctly. The thing is, that it's not really "fantasy" as much as it is "overstatement" in a sort of expressionist way. If one could render expressionist painting into prose, I guess Magical Realism would be one of the forms of how it would turn out. It's sort of putting emotions and ideas into a physical form to make them more tangible and more symbolic at the same time.

Like for instance the idea of the stars, of communicating via the reflective power of the stars, and the instances you have mentioned there.

Hmm, though wasn't it Gertrudis's breasts that Pedro saw first? I'd have to re-read that bit to make sure...

Michele wrote: "The thing that really bothers me is that Tita doesn't just walk away or figure some way out instead of just taking it. This takes points off her heroic scorecard for me.
..."

That is an excellent point, and maybe one we can discuss in more detail when we discuss Chapter 5 in the next thread. :)

Traveller wrote: "I liked this passage and the passages that follow it:

She was not meant for the loser’s role. She would put on a triumphant expression. Like a great actress, she played her role with dignity, tryi..."

I think the whole idea of Tita not wanting to be a victim highlights again the breaking down of the binary of victim and aggressor that patriarchy thrives on. By refusing to see herself as a victim, Tita is asserting her feminism, or her politics.

Traveller wrote: "Hmm, on the one hand I think I can see why some feminists get their knickers in a tangle about this novel, because so far the only way presented for a woman to be, is very traditionally feminine, a..."

Agree on all the points Traveller. I would suggest reading " Feminist Messages." Its all about coding and folklore. This entire novel is about how women code. I used this book for a paper I wrote on foodways and folklore and how women code and challenge patriarchy through foodways

Sounds interesting, Disha! This book? Feminist Messages: Coding in Women's Folk Culture by Joan Newlon Radner.

Yes, whereas Mama Elena and Gertrudis took on the system according to the patriarchal rules and became "female patriarchs", Tita does it on her own, more feminine terms.

...like you say, she completely breaks the rules of the system, she doesn't simply swap roles with men like many rebellious women do.

I might want to re-post the link to the next thread again. It's here: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Traveller wrote: "Sounds interesting, Disha! This book? Feminist Messages: Coding in Women's Folk Culture by Joan Newlon Radner.

Yes, whereas Mama Elena and Gertrudis took on the sy..."

Yea, absolutely. And like that Tita does that. Yes, that is exactly the book I was referring to. I need to study it for my folklore exam.

Disha wrote: "folklore exam. .."

Folklore exam! I know it's probably actually relatively dry and boring academic material (I had to do Vladimir Propp's analysis for discourse analysis, so I have an idea) but just saying it makes it sound like something positively delightful! XD

Traveller wrote: "Disha wrote: "folklore exam. .."

Folklore exam! I know it's probably actually relatively dry and boring academic material (I had to do Vladimir Propp's analysis for discourse analysis, so I have..."

Yea, I have had to read Propp too! However, Folklore does have a wide ranging of topics and of course works ( not all are dry like Propp). We will talk about it sometime :)

Disha wrote: "Yea, I have had to read Propp too! However, Folklore does have a wide ranging of topics and of course works ( not all are dry like Propp). We will talk about it sometime :) ..."

I would love to chat with you about it - perhaps if you review one of the works sometime? I find folklore interesting from both a psychological and a sociological/cultural angle.

Traveller wrote: "Disha wrote: "Yea, I have had to read Propp too! However, Folklore does have a wide ranging of topics and of course works ( not all are dry like Propp). We will talk about it sometime :) ..."

I wo..."
Yes! A chat would be lovely! Most often we don't realise how much folklore is a large part of our lives. I will review some of the books I am reading for the exam for sure.

I am finished with chapter 4 now. I find this book a much faster read than The Blind Assassin, in terms of reading speed, not page numbers.

I might have a slightly different dimension to add to the whiteness Tita sees. When I read it, I was thinking about the white sheet as being not only about virginity but the fact that it won't be white for long, through consummation of Rosaura's marriage. Tita might be obsessing over the whiteness of the sheet because she is holding on to that moment before everything changes for her, losing Pedro through marriage to her sister, in which case the whiteness will be stained with blood and not so white anymore. The whiteness might symbolise the love she is holding on to before she loses it. Something can be felt or looked at very intensely when you know you are about to lose it. I don't know, just what I was thinking.

When you introduced the book, Traveller, you mentioned that some feminists do not like this book so I've been looking out for signs while reading. It's still early but so far I don't really see anything much offensive. The characters are limited in their choices because of the social environment they live in and through their mother, so I see someone like Tita trying to make the best of the circumstances she has been thrown in. Pedro could probably have refused the marriage but who knows what his options were? I do think that marrying someone's sister to be closer to that person is not the way to go. I also see that Mama Elena's restriction on Tita regarding marriage is the cause of the chaos in the family. If Tita hadn't been miserable while she was making the cake, her sister's wedding wouldn't have been destroyed because of everybody throwing up. Tita and Rosaura might have been closer. Tita's passion building up through forbidding her to marry and which was transferred into the rose dish is what caused her sister to run off and join a brothel. It seems that Mama Elena just made things more difficult for herself and tore apart her family. I will see how the novel progresses further. It might still get offensive :)

Traveller said: "The thing is, that it's not really "fantasy" as much as it is "overstatement" in a sort of expressionist way. If one could render expressionist painting into prose, I guess Magical Realism would be one of the forms of how it would turn out. It's sort of putting emotions and ideas into a physical form to make them more tangible and more symbolic at the same time"

Absolutely yes to this. I love Magic Realism because I love expressionist paintings and to have this effect being created with words is awesome, it gives so much more depth and another dimension to a novel. Since I am late to this discussion these are all my thoughts so far in one post :p

Awesome, Yolande! I like your very astute catch there with the whiteness. I guess I never thought to take it that far, but now that you have, it certainly works for me. *applause*

Yolande wrote: "When you introduced the book, Traveller, you mentioned that some feminists do not like this book so I've been looking out for signs while reading. It's still early but so far I don't really see anything much offensive.."

Well, many feminists -depending on your particular brand of feminism, have found the kind of glorification of the traditional feminine role as embodied in Tita and her cooking, cleaning, and general servant-like existence as a re-affirmation of traditional gender stereotypes.

Personally I can see where Disha is coming from in saying that Tita/Esquivel subtly subverts this role into a reciprocal position of power. Tita exerts power via her cooking. Not only does she penetrate, which is a symbolically male action, but she has the power of influencing people's emotions via her cooking.

The traditional feminine aspect that I personally found very attractive about her, are her immense nurturing abilities. Not only does she nurture with her food and cooking, but babies just need to be around her for her to take on a mothering role whether it is her biological child or not.

I think many feminists need to realize that not all traditional 'feminine' traits are negative - sadly many women have rejected them because they are part of what had contributed to make women appear to be the "weaker" gender and automatically along with that, second-rate citizens, and in some views, not even fully human - where "man" is the default and "wo-man" is some slapped on afterthought only created to serve man.

I might have more to say on the subject later, but i hope that at least answers your question to some extent, Yolande. (And I do know you are versed in feminist theory, if you thought I was stating some of the obvious but as we both know, you get your various divisions and flavors of feminist, so I was trying to bring those earlier comments of mine into context.) :)