I’ve quickly scanned ALL the exams (just to get a sense of what you did with the questions–remember, I wanted them to be interesting for you!) and I want you all to know that I’m pleased with what I saw.

Good luck with all your other exams. I’ll miss you!

Good Luck!

Why does Rosaura simply stand by and watch her husband flirt with her sister? Why does she not take action like the woman she plans to grow up to be (Mama Elena)? Does she lack the essential guts to stand up to her sister? Is this reflective of Mama Elena’s possible fear of Rosaura?

I just dumped a cold bucket of raw questions on your head…and only the first few will have to deal with my point. I apologize.

Anyways, continuing with my point…I do not understand why Rosaura is keeping PEdro…is it for her pride? She showed no signs of loving him, but rather simply wanting to possess what her sister(Tita) wanted to possess. Does she not feel flicked off by Pedro everytime he refuses to talk to her or have sex with her without the sheet? Is Rosaura so desperate to keep her pride and outdo her sister that she would put up with Pedro not loving her? I suspect that the high pride that Mama Elena keeps has influenced Rosaura to be the same. She feels favoured, compared to Tita, and wants to keep that image. Pride is something we all have to a certain degree, and I certainly have a huuuuge pride. However, if someone did not love me and I still pursued them, trying to convince others that I was still with this person, I think I would be destroying my pride more than keeping it. What do you think are the motives behind Rosaura’s actions?

I think that this cook book symbolizes that even when people die, the cooking of a family will survive. And somehow, when the recipes of a family passes on, so does the essence and history of the family. The author further backs this up by having Esperanza’s daughter tell the story of a huge family of people that she’s never met. And she through Tita’s stories, she connects herself to the De La Garza family. This is shown when Esperanza’s daughter says “…Or why my tears flow so freely when I prepare them – perhaps I am as sensitive to onions as Tita, my great-aunt, who will go on living as long as someone cooks her recipes” p246.

This connection to Tita is repeated on p1 when the narrator says “Mama used to say it was because I was especially sensitive to onions, like my great-aunt, Tita”. 

The last page emphasizes the fact that Esperanza’s daughter is very much like Tita and even points out that Tita lives in her recipes, which could be expanded to that Tita lives in Esperanza’s daughter who cooks her recipes. It specifically shows that food not only connects a family together physically; it also connects generations and ties in the history of a family.

Let me elaborate, Tita and Mama Elena went through remarkably similar dilemmas as both were denied their “True Love” by their parent(s). But then why did Mama Elena turn out so differently? The answer is, of course, that her lover went belly up. So she, for one reason or another, adopted the “last girl” tradition which consequently enslaved Tita. Although the reader is probably fed to the teeth with sympathizing with Mama Elena, imagine for a moment that the one person you “loved” most in this world died( A parent maybe? Humour me). Doesn’t it feel cold? Don’t you feel your chest implode? And doesn’t this sound a whole lot like what Tita was feeling for roughly half the book(perhaps to a lesser extent than Mama Elena). What would have happened, pray tell, if Mama Elena had reacted differently, not to the point of crushing Tita’s face? Would she still be on the ranch? What kind of person would she have ended up as? Can a person really bear that much emotional tension without going absolutely nuts?

I ask you: is it possible that Mama Elena’s actions may actually have saved Tita by sending her into Doctor Brown’s caring arms?

- Kelvin

Disagreements and critical rebuttals are welcome

I think the use of the mexican revolution was intended by the author to make this kind of a connection to the actual story. Any thoughts or opinions?

Even though this idea does not seem to have much affect on the general outcome of the story, the mention of birds extends to the pages of other works we have studied. For instance, in The Romance of Tristan and Iseult, King Mark first falls in love with Iseult by seeing a single strand of her hair. This hair was carried by a dove. Therefore, had there been no bird, the events of the story would have differed dramatically. A separate example would be Tristan’s means of meeting Iseult under the tall pine tree. Tristan would draw Iseult’s attention by imitating the call of a nightingale on such occasions. Similarities can also be noticed in the reference to birds in Romeo and Juliet. Although the actual presence of birds is not noted to be important (unlike the other two texts mentioned), the mentioning of birds (mostly nightingales and larks) was rather frequent in conversations between Romeo and Juliet, as we had discussed in class. This clearly creates imagery and contributes to the overall enhancement of the story.

Seeing as to how three similar stories (similar in the sense that they all revolve around a couple’s love being obstructed by others) mention birds with such frequency, I am lead to believe that the use of this idea in each story is more than just a coincidence.

Then why on earth is the entire novel about the conflict, the breaking, the destruction of a family?!

Tita hates Mama Elena for keeping the horrible tradition of not allowing the youngest daughter to marry. Tita hates Mama Elena for suggesting the marriage between Pedro and her sister Rosaura. Mama Elena hates Tita for being a disobedient daughter. Tita hates Mama Elena for killing Roberto and then goes insane. When she returns home, Mama Elena insists that Tita is poisoning her with bitter food.

Tita hates Rosaura for marrying her love, Pedro. Rosaura hates Tita for having an affair with her husband. Tita hates Rosaura for continuing the horrible tradition regarding the youngest daughter.

Gertrudis hates Mama Elena for being such a control monster in the house. When she runs away, Mama Elena is so disappointed in her daughter, she disowns Gertrudis and refuses to acknowledge that she ever existed.

Now, let’s take into account all the unfortunate events that befall this family. There are the awful love triangles (Tita-Pedro-Rosaura and Pedro-Tita-John) that cause so much trouble. Chencha is raped. Nacha dies in grief. Roberto dies due to unknown reasons. Rosaura dies from stomach problems. Mama Elena dies from taking the syrup of ipecac. Tita and Pedro die from an overdose of passion.

In conclusion, by the end of the book, the family has been completely destroyed.

Don’t you find it ironic that the main theme is family?!

To decide whether or not she was a good parent, we must first define what success is; the problem is, how do you define a ‘successful’ child? The easiest way to define it would be someone who is a functioning part of society. That includes education, social skills, life skills, etc. That model is rather general, but does it apply to all parents? I think not. The problem with this question is that success is relative.

So it seems that we must define Mama Elena’s terms of success. What Mama wanted is a daughter that would care for her until she died. She wanted a daughter that could cook, clean, and do laundry. She also wanted someone who could keep the ranch going when she was unable to. According to this model, Mama Elena succeeded.

But – and this is a big but – we must consider that parents always have their childrens’ best interest at heart (that point is not up for discussion, it’s true, end of story: ask any parent). Because of this, it is very likely that Mama Elena wanted Tita to be happy. This is where we encounter somewhat of a circle: Mama Elena imposes strict limits on Tita which make her want to break those limits, in this case by seeing Pedro, which cause Mama Elena to impose stricter limits. Parenting is about balance; Mama Elena has yet to find this balance. Children want limitations but they need freedom. I could go on for pages, but let’s just say that, in this area, she failed.

Another area we must consider is that she ended up having an affair with her sister’s husband. It is very clear that this is not what Mama Elena wanted her child to grow up to do, yet at the same time, it was her shortcomings as a parent that caused this. Mama Elena is the reason that Tita and Pedro couldn’t be together, and she’s the reason that Pedro married Rosura instead of Pedro. Once again, a failure.

I think it’s fair to say that Mama Elena is a bad parent, bt not for the reasons that you might think. In the end, she turned Tita into what she wanted, but at the cost of Tita’s happyness. She also failed in controlling her daughter. In her defense, her other 2 daughters turned out a lot better, however she definately failed Tita as a parent.

What I want to know is, do you think that Mama Elena was a bad perent? But more importantly, did she do the right thing?