|
I was able to finish Laura Esquivel's latest novel only because I loved her
previous one, Like Water for Chocolate, a charming magical realist story
about unsatisfied desires. Like Water for Chocolate was a beautifully
written fairy tale that didn't pretend to be anything more than entertainment. I
slogged through Swift as Desire with the ultimately unrealized hope that
Esquivel would match this delightful experience. Esquivel, however, apparently
chose to make Swift as Desire a more serious novel, and it suffers for
it. She attempts to weave Mayan mythology, modern science, and historical data
into a romance story. The result reads like miscellaneous excerpts from high
school textbooks, self-help books, and Popular Mechanics.
The plot is ostensibly about words, and how we communicate – or
miscommunicate – in every day life. The main character of the story, Jubilo,
has the unique gift of being able to decipher peoples’ unspoken desires. As a
young boy, he serves as a translator for his Spanish-speaking mother and Mayan
grandmother. By "mistranslating" their conversations, he was able to
fix their troubled relationships. Years later, working as a telegraph operator,
Jubilo continues to try to help people express their true feelings in words. Yet
Jubilo is not always able to understand the true feelings of the person closest
to him, his wife Lucha, and this eventually leads to the disintegration of their
marriage. Unlike the consistent lightness of Like Water for Chocolate,
everything about Swift as Desire is heavy handed. The prose ranges from
the melodramatic – "Who could have warned him that he would end up lying
in bed, in a near vegetable state and incapable of communicating with those
around him? Who?" – to the mind-numbingly dull:
People hide their feelings from others, often behind pretty words, or silence
them to avoid violating social conventions. The discordance between desires and
words causes all kinds of communication problems and gives rise to a double
standard both in individuals, who say one thing, yet do another.
At first such clumsiness could be attributed to a poor translation, but a
comparison with the Spanish edition suggests that the original prose is just as
ponderous.
The plot consists of several major (often uninteresting) incidents, followed
by pages of analysis and proselytizing on subjects from the nature of love to
the technology behind the telegraph system. The characters in the story do not
develop but rather act in whatever way is convenient to propel the plot.
Conversations do not resemble normal patterns of speech; in Esquivel’s world,
a simple question can trigger the confession of one’s deepest secrets.
Jubilo’s miraculous gift is never deeply explored, nor is the tension
between the Mayan and Spanish heritage. Ultimately, the reader is left quite
unimpressed with Jubilo’s so-called "gift" because the story only
focuses on the few occasions when it fails him (a phenomenon Equivel tries to
demystify by attributing it to sunspots, as though Jubilo were nothing more than
a cellular phone.) Jubilo, Esquivel shows, is doomed when he has the misfortune
of being like the rest of us – forced to rely on his own instincts and
knowledge of those around him. Having dismissed Jubilo’s talent, the novel s
reduced to a rather mundane story about a man’s misunderstanding with his
wife.
Despite the seductive title and the bodice-ripper, even the romantic elements
of the story fail. One quickly grows weary of the relationship between Jubilo
and his wife, which seems more pathetic than romantic. The two apparently
married in order to have fabulous sex, with continues to drive the relationship
for the rest of the story. Esquivel provides us with disturbingly unromantic
descriptions of their physical intimacy, such as: "Jubilo had carefully
mapped out his wife’s erogenous zones. He had catalogued her points of
greatest sensitivity." This clinical description of sex is in keeping with
Esquivel’s general desire to demystify every aspect of her book.
Esquivel is much more compelling as a magical realist writer. The beauty of
this genre is that people feel no need to demystify the supernatural. In Like
Water for Chocolate, the cook’s emotions become part of the food she
makes, infecting everyone with her feelings; the reader is spared any attempt to
explain such a phenomenon, and this makes the story more interesting.
For some reason, Esquivel needs to give every mysterious event in Swift as
Desire some kind of scientific or historical credibility. The story is often
interrupted by long passages containing unilluminating scientific or historical
data. Take for instance, the account of one of the many arguments between Jubilo
and Lucha:
Usually Jubilo…understood why people said ‘I hate you’ instead of ‘I
love you’ and vice versa. But now he kept misinterpreting the signals Lucha
sent him. To Jubilo his wife was like the Enigma machine used by the Germans
during World War II to send encoded messages. During the war, the radio served
as an essential tool…
This non sequitur continues for several paragraphs before Esquivel
returns to the actual story. It is difficult to be swept up in the passion of
the story if it is constantly being interrupted in such a manner. Esquivel is a
wonderful storyteller, and one wishes she would do just that: tell a story, no
belabor it.
Even worse is Esquivel’s insistence on explaining every emotion, every
silence, every gesture to her reader, as though she is afraid the audience will
not understand how everything ties in to her overarching theme of language. Yet
many of these ideas would actually be better off unspoken. In doubting her
audience, Esquivel also doubts herself, as though an audience wouldn’t be able
to glean the deeper meaning from the story. The unexplainable – and the
romance – become unromantic.
Perhaps the problem with the book is that it is too much like real life. It
is at times boring, random, repetitive, disorganized, and downright unpleasant.
If Like Water for Chocolate was able to distill from life everything that
is beautiful and mystical, Swift as Desire does just the opposite.
|