Mama Elena, Tita, & Character Development

Throughout the blog and in in-class discussions, a very hot topic has been the debate about Mama Elena and her true intentions – if she was a cruel or good parent. However, let us disregard this argument for a while. In a way, Mama Elena may have actually positively helped Tita in her personal character development. Is it not because of Mama Elena’s strict and harsh treatment on Tita that Tita has such an angry and determined will? Or happenings such as Tita being forced to resew her stitches because she did not baste it (page 12)?. It is also reasonable to say that Tita’s mental and physical strength against suffering was improved with the beatings that she got. In addition, by “getting hit in the face with a wooden spoon”, as discussed in Kelvin’s earlier post, Tita suffered a lot but even resulted in a better place. Because of the torture inflicted on Tita, she developed an extremely strong spirit as an adult. Do you agree? Please understand, however, that I am not saying that I support Mama Elena’s actions. I am just saying that Mama Elena’s actions, which we mostly regard as cruel, may have had an indirect positive effect on Tita.

 

Is it unconditional love?

Have you ever noticed how the women in some of the romances we have read always reconsider (at some point or other) if they really love the other person?Of course we all know that there is nothing to reconsider; they love this person eternally. I was concentrating again on connections between all the romances, and found this to be recurring.

In ‘Tristan and Iseult’ , there is a little misunderstanding between the two lovers.On p.172, Iseult believes that Tristan has betrayed her and that his feelings have passed on to another Iseult because of false information communicated unintentionally. She decides to never again see Tristan and shuns him any time he tries to get near, like when he comes disguised as a leper to the church door, or when he comes as a Madman to court. Afterwards, of course, Iseult finds that she cannot live without Tristan and then is forced to admit that she’ll love him eternally.

This happens also in ‘Romeo and Juliet’, though over a span of a few minutes. Starting on line 79, Juliet will insult Romeo, driven by her grief for the death of Tybalt. She talks about how he has deceived her, using many powerful metaphors. However, just a few lines after on line 99, when she has heard these insults coming from the nurse, her opinion changes drastically, and again she admits to herself that she cannot live without Romeo.

This connection also holds true for the most recent romance. In ‘ Like Water for Chocolate ‘, Tita is in love with Pedro since the day she set eyes on him, but when he agrees to marry Rosaura, she reconsiders her love for him. She tries to put him off her mind and move on , but when she learns of his true intentions, that spark that had dimmed, fired back up. A similar thing occurs when Pedro leaves for San Antonio. She establishes a relationship with John and then is not sure who she loves. When he comes back though, we know too well that Tita can only truly love Pedro.

So as you can see this happens in many of the romances. This might be a way the author has to reinforce the strength of the love between the couples. If their love can be broken easily, then there was no real love in the first place. On the other hand, if both lovers cannot forget each other no matter how much time passes or what circumstances change, then that love was always there. Could there be other reasons? Also, did you find this in any of the other stories?

 

Chewing with your mouth empty

    Tita is depicted by the author as a wholesome, caring person: a provider and nurturer of life. However, when Tita presumes that she is pregnant, it becomes evident that propriety has great mastery over her. In her hallucinations, Mama Elena’s ghost brought up to reprimand Tita for her bastard child she will give birth to – a sign that it is TIta guilt, not her mother, which is tormenting her. When the pregnancy turns out to be nothing but a late period, her relief implies a strange inconsistency. Although she is an innate nurturer, the societal scar that the child represents seems to conquer the intuitive instincts that the author had so vividly represented. I thought this was particularly odd, since it came at a point in the book where Mama Elena’s influenced seemed to be waning. (The author has another one of these paradoxes’s in the later stages of the novel when Tita, who seems to becoming more liberal, chooses Pedro (who became less appealing to the readers as the book progressed) over John(who seemed to be less sexual in his desire for Tita) at a point where John seemed to be the appropriate fit – something that seems inconsistent with Tita’s revolutionary new personality but seems fitting as the ending).

  Propriety’s importance in Tita’s life also manifests itself after the confrontation she had with her sister Rosaura after their argument in which Tita is diminished to the status of a willing sex bunny by Rosaura. At this point, Tita imagines a metaphoric tornado that bloodies Esperanza’s white diapers (something with seems  somewhat reminiscent of a “white shift”), a sign thats she knows her metaphoric innocence has been sullied by having sex with Pedro.

   Strange.

      – Kelvin

           Disagreements and critical remarks are welcome

 

 

Overcoming Biases

There has been much debate over Mama’s Elena true intentions, her actions, her morals and the lack thereof. If I were to ask a random selection of you, your opinions in regards to Mama Elena would be nearly synonymous. We consider Mama Elena’s approach to controlling Tita’s life as unjust. The key word is WE. Our views however are not reflective, that’s right, NOT, of the views of many people not only in other nations but our own as well. As the developed countries continue down a path towards a more socialist existence, we have dropped many fundamental beliefs that had formed the backbone of our predecessors societies, communities and yes, families.

Corporal Punishment is a recurring theme in Mama Elena’s methods towards raising her children. We, as members of a society that has effectively banned the use of such force, wince at any mention of beatings. Did Mama Elena really love her children? Did she enjoy beating her children? If you think that mama Elena did not love her children, then the vast majority of parents (Back then), in your eyes, would hate their children. Mama Elena is in no way an isolated case, in fact, she closer to average traditionalist mother than most of us give her credit.

The use of corporal punishment is solid proof that Mama Elena loves her children. Certainly many of you will disagree. If Mama Elena loves her children, then her daughter’s best interests are her own as well. She beats her children because she wants the best for them. Knowing no other way, she resorts to beating her children to make them conform to the ideal image. We cannot refer to her as a cruel dictator. Her actions are justified and are, in her opinion, in the best interests of her daughter.

Adopting the traditionalist point of view, the unjust actions of Mama Elena are entirely justified. Now Tita appears to be the crazy self-centred revolutionary. Her unjustified actions would eventually drive her mother to kill herself. She killed her mother over the love of another man. Is this what the mother that had cared for her and brought her into this world deserved?

In order to understand mama Elena’s actions, one must become mama Elena. You have to become a fundamentalist mother. This can be hard, as the book itself is written from a more liberal point of view, one that consorts with Tita. The same recollection of events from a more conservative/fundamentalist point of view would look very different.

When interpreting the actions, motives, morals etc of a character very different to yourself, you must adopt their point of view. When you do, it becomes possible to sympathize, or at least, understand, the people who are depicted as ruthless, uncaring, and unjust.

I think it would be very interesting if everyone to interpret the book from Mama Elena’s point of view and then left comments in this thread. It would shine a very different light over the novel.

 

Getting to the Root of the Problem

When teens have caused a serious crime or have been a victim of some kind, before providing closure, councilors will always try and find the root of the problem. Whether it has originated from a familial issue, bullies or physical abuse, there is always a reason for their action.

Reflecting on Mama Elena’s past personality, we heard of no strictness or coldness. She was loving, daring and free, but when unthought-of circumstances happened (her husband discovering her secret), her view on life reflected it. She had shared love with a man she could not have, and because of her infidelity, caused her husband’s death. Up until that moment, Mama Elena didn’t realize what an impact her actions had caused on her family.

Now that she had become the person in charge of the ranch and her daughters, there was no room for sympathy or regret. She was going to make sure her daughters’ lives would not mirror hers. She held her head up high, showed no heart-felt emotions and blocked off all past memories behind her. She thought that this would protect her daughters from begin hurt; by preventing them from loving anyone until marriage. She was going to follow family tradition and go by arranged marriages.

The book wasn’t too clear on why Mama Elena’s personality had changed so suddenly. She was always portrayed as the antagonist, but didn’t she used to be the protagonist? Do you guys think that was another purpose for Mama Elena’s sudden change in personalities?

 

Revolution and rebelliousness!

The revolution is in progress/starting and as this happens, we can see that the family has been affected by it in their own way. Although the revolution seems to be a backdrop and concept outside of the house, it enters the house in its own way.

Tita seems to be most affected by the revolution. Despite someone as important as her mother scolding her, Tita lets her hatred out against her mother . Not only is this normally disrespectful, but the fact that her mother is already dead, makes it even more powerful. Normally our feelings against the dead fade as they are no longer there to be loved or to threaten, but Mama Elena takes full advantage of her ghost form. As a result, full action is taken back against her. Tita’s rebellious spirit shows as early as p.12, where she does not baste the clothes. Mama Elena scolds Tita, but Tita speaks out against her mother, complaining about the amount of effort that she had put into the work. Despite being raised to follow the rules, she, of all the girls, rebels the most, it seems. After all, it was only Tita who hadn’t used the title Mami to Mama Elena when she was growing up as a child.

Ona the ohter hand, Pedro, a very nice and comely man starts turning into a love-lust driven monster, chomping at the bit for Tita. How does the story and Tita’s rebellious spirit move in correlation to Pedro’s intentions?

Where else does Tita rebel? Where else do we see characters being revolutionized?

 

What makes Tita so incredibly important? What are Mama Elena’s true intentions?

Of course the author has her own reasons, but I wonder why, in this dysfunctional family, WHY the author concentrated on Tita. Perhaps it was the theme that this book had to be guided with recipes or it had to start with the exciting birth Tita had. I wonder why Rosaura, or better yet, Gertrudis were not characters that were concentrated on. When Gertrudies left, the story practically scooted her into some corner where she wouldn’t be heard from for a couple of months. When Rosaura moved out, the author made no attempts at trying to describe her life. Why is the story centered ONLY on Tita? Are her emotions richer?

We can see that, although she is certainly the most oppressed child, she is also the child with the greatest capabilities. It is slightly contradictory, no? It is just like how she cannot distinguish tears of sorrow from tears of laughter, happiness and sorrow maybe twisted together for her. She can cook well, she is beautiful, she can sympathize with everyone and deal with being oppressed better than the rest of the children…Is it her oppression that leads her from an unblossomed state to a fiery and burst flower?

This brings us to another point…do you think Mama Elena had truly wanted for Tita to turn out this way? We know that Mama Elena is a very capable woman, would she hinder the youngest daughter so that she would become the best for her age? Also, think about her responsibilities as a mother. Her first child was Gertrudis, then she had Rosaura. Gertrudis came from a different parent, so Rosaura maybe her first child that she thought was her connection to her other husband. Perhaps she felt that Rosaura was tainted because she was the first to connect (since the first with a new connection may always be exploited as a connection point rather than a true child) so she had another child, this child Tita. Deciding Tita would be her last child, she would use the untainted daughter as her maid. *cough cough* and knowing she would be the most experienced and grow up untainted, perhaps Elena thought that Tita could have a good later life being an experienced housekeeper, a caretaker or even a late mother, which would not seem like a bad life. It would not give Tita the chance to be harmed like her mother.

Opinions? I did go off on a tangent so I know that I may start getting very inaccurate to the story at times. Correct me freely.

 

Rosaura

Who is the most unfortunate character?

The answer that immediately comes to mind is Tita. Upon birth, her fate is to care for her mother until death. She meets the love of her life, Pedro, and she may not marry him, or even love him freely. She watches Pedro get married to her sister (of all people!), and may not express sadness, anger, or jealousy. My goodness, Tita has to even make the wedding cake and pretend to be happy at the wedding! Pedro and Rosaura go on to have children, they live together, and they are (seemingly) one happy family. All the while Tita is a lonely girl, with no joy and no love.

Let’s consider Rosaura. Rosaura gets to be married, but to someone she hardly knows. It is highly probable that Rosaura does not love Pedro, and that if she had her way, she would not be marrying. In my opinion, she is just as much a victim of Mama Elena’s iron rule as Tita is. However, Rosaura doesn’t seem to be as strong-willed and resentful of tradition. Perhaps the lure of being able to start a family, which all girls want, is enough to follow along with the decision. (It’s hard to be sure, as we never get too much of her perspective.)

Now, after being happily married, Rosaura finds out the truth. Her husband does not love her. Her husband only married her in order to be close to Tita. In fact, at every opportunity, Pedro will be spending time with Tita instead of Rosaura. The truth is that Rosaura, in reality, does not have a husband. She must fight constantly with her sister to gain back her rightful husband. It is a losing battle that she will never win.

Rosaura has a baby. The one fortunate thing to happen in her life. Something that belongs to Rosaura and no one else. And then the baby is taken away. Is it coincidence or something that she has no milk? Why does every disaster land on her shoulders? On the other hand, Tita does have milk. Tita becomes the mother, and Rosaura… well, she’s just a nobody.

To make matters worse, Roberto dies. When she has her second child, there are problems during labour, leaving her unable to ever get pregnant again. Hard luck, eh?

The end of Rosaura’s life, to put it simply, is embarrassing. She is fat and smelly and nobody can stand to be with her for an extra second. Abandoned and lonely, with no joy and no love…

It makes me wonder if we should be siding with Tita, or with poor poor Rosaura.

 

Mama Elena; why she did what she did

I too have been away. The blog is impressive in size and depth. There is so much to read, and I haven’t finished so I hope I’m not repeating what anyone else has said. Anyway, this is a strand about Mama Elena and her possible motives. I’m curious what you think, so please add comments. Here goes…

I am very interested in why Mama Elena chose to keep up the ‘younger daughter’ tradition and not allow Tita to leave or marry. Now, because of the time and place she grew up, we can begin to understand, if not excuse, her thinking. I, however, cannot understand why a such a strong woman would force such an unfair sentence on anyone, not to mention her own daughter. Here are some possibilities:

Perhaps her need to be loved and cared for blinded her better judgement. This is possible; her selfish need to have someone care for her in her old age could have caused her to uphold a morally wrong tradition. Most people fear loneliness and abandonment and, as she aged, Mama Elena may have felt increasing anxiety for being left alone by her daughters. Upholding this wrongful custom may have been the only way she knew to keep someone with her and, out of fear and selfishness, she did it.

Perhaps it was her own love for Tita, displayed by Mama Elena in the only way she knew how, that made her act this way. During the book, she rarely, if ever, displays emotions other than anger or indifference. We know that, in her youth at least, she was capable of love and happiness. I’m sure that deep down she loved her daughters, even Tita. Maybe the only we she could express this was by ‘protecting’ Tita and keeping her with her.

Maybe she was bitter and hardened by her own lost love, and her seemingly heartless actions now were a result of her broken hearted past. Mama Elena’s secret past could have had long lasting effects. Although this might have made her more sympathetic to Tita’s cause, it seems that she took to the opposite extreme; she completely rejects the idea of true love. Could it be that her heart break and loveless marriage hardened her against young passion?

It could be that she upheld tradition for tradition’s sake. Although I don’t think this is very likely, it is possible that she simply wanted to keep this custom going on through generations, just as the family recipes were passed on. Many people cling on to what is old and familiar and are unwilling to change. Maybe this was her only reasoning.

Mama Elena’s actions were selfish and unfair. No matter what her motives were behind forbidding Tita to marry or to be happy, I still believe Tita was in the right. Traditions are, often, unfair and, if you stop to think about them, illogical. This one is particularly unjust and this story brings that to light.

Why do you guys think Mama Elena did what she did?