This happens towards the end of the passage after the narrator has established that she had an affair with the "boy's" father as well as the "boy", who is actually a grown man with a child of his own. The recurring motif of calling the man a boy symbolically shows that the narrator has power over him after explicitly say that she has this power over him. It is an erotic power reinforced by the diction of letting the boy "nibble" at her as well as her actions of rubbing his belly and "stroking" him. This not only fits into the recurring theme of sexuality throughout the entire piece, but is the highpoint in it's expression.
I can tell from the way [the boy] looks at me, I have him in my power. Come, sparrow. I have the patience of eternity. Come to mamita. My stupid little bird. I don't move. I don't startle him. I let him nibble. All, all for you. Rub his belly. Stroke him. Before I snap my teeth.
Her assertion of power goes beyond what is purely sexual when she calls him "my stupid little bird" after calling him a sparrow as if to demean him. It's curious that the word sparrow was chosen to describe him before calling him stupid since sparrows, as with most birds, are intelligent creatures. Not to mention, the symbolic meaning of flight and its connotations with freedom almost make these thoughts ironic considering the power the narrator claims she has over this boy. This marks a sort of regression in her power over him, noting that it is not a complete power. This is also duly noted noted with the use of the word mamita, an endearing term which literally translates into "little mama". Although she has this sexual power over this boy, she also takes on this almost motherly role willing to wait "for eternity" as well as rubbing his belly.
This internalized monologue has a very sexual mood where implied sexuality and eroticism blend when taking into context the rest of the piece. But as it stands on it's own, there is a degree of ambiguity to it, highlighted by the motherly undertones it provides. Given this, both interpretations make a lot of sense considering that the narrator admittedly had an affair with the boy's father and particularly when the boy was being born in a hospital. Could it be that she has "motherly" feeling toward him as well as sexual attraction? Is there a sort of freedom to being in that position being able to explore different facets of her sexuality; both the caregiver and the taker/heartbreaker?
After all, the narrator ends this extraction with "Before I snap my teeth" which is makes this passage even more ambiguous considering that it carries obvious sexual connotations compared to a sort of innate animal characteristic of a mother fending off attackers to protect her young. The use of the word "boy" makes that character act as a foil to make that point even more prominent. It is very much like the mother bear protecting her cubs.
As for a connection with the greater meaning of the prose, it is difficult to really see a point that she was trying to explicitly make. There is nothing specifically about why you should not marry a Mexican but perhaps her anecdotes are supposed to serve as reasons not to when she tells of no Mexican man being able to satisfy her love. An interpretation that I am partial to is that she starts to embody a motherly role to fill that void of love that is impossible for a man to fill for her. By the end of the piece, it seemed to have started working as the narrator's tone moves away from something along the lines of bitter resentment to something more at peace with the nature of humanity.
Note: My question for discussion is the bolded paragraph above.
No comments:
Post a Comment