El Jardín de los Senderos que se Bifurcan

BORGES

How does the absence of the first two pages affect our understanding and appreciation of the rest of the story?
It gives it a sense of reality where it is very common to lose pages of a reading and this specific situation makes it acquire more credibility.
Personally, I also believe it leaves a lot of holes in the story but apparently not necessary for the understanding of what is going on. I think some pieces of information are left out on purpose, for example, we never know how he ended up doing what he did, why Albert city was important or “the one city”, we never know how he figures this out or many other things because it is trying to get our attention elsewhere and an easy way of getting rid of irrelevant information, which in the end also adds to the whole mystery of the story.

An explicit reference is made to the Thousand and One Nights, a recursively narrated work of literature. In what ways is Borges's story "The Garden of Forking Paths" recursive? What other recurring patterns are evident. (Clue: the idea of a labyrinth)

I believe the way in which he tells gets to the last story is itself explaining the last story. It is like in order for us to understand the labyrinth of time and what he meant by forking paths in relation to this, he needed to tell the story in that particular way. All that happens and all stories or “bifurcaciones” within the story tell us the same thing but with a different structure. All process the character goes through to get to the story of the labyrinth explains the labyrinth and something that never ends as it is a story within a story within a story that could possibly never end. One story explains the other and visceversa.


What exactly is the solution that Stephen Albert has discovered to the mystery concerning the project of the narrator's ancestor?
When the ancestor died, nobody found the labyrinth he said he would make and they found his literary work disconnected and unfinished. Arthur, after reading many times and analyzing it thoroughly, gets to understand the literary work in its own logic. He thinks the labyrinth was the book itself and not apart. He also explains why he thinks the book is a labyrinth because it can be read as multiple possibilities that all happen which is why when read from our logical point of view makes no sense at all. The piece the ancestor wrote never mentions the word “time” because it is saying time in many different ways and is like a riddle about time so he cannot mention it.

What precisely is the analogy that connects a labyrinth in space with a labyrinth in time? What kind of questions does Borges raise in the story about the nature of Time.
Just as a person can be in a labyrinth and have multiple choices in that same space, the same happens in time. By holding that time has many possibilities and ways and all of these are happening at once.

How does the story relate to hypertext? (find a definition of "hypertext")
Borges’ story can be related to hypertext because as you are reading it you need to look up certain words, books, names, events, etc in order for you to understand the story and what they are talking about but these same things you look up take you to a different thing you might you need to look up in order to understand that same thing. So, it could be an endless search when trying to understand the story. It also relates to what the story is about with the labyrinth and the endless searches and choices one can make.


List all the "authors" in the story, their relationship to each other, and how each contributes to the narrative. Describe how Borges blurs the traditional distinction between author, narrator, and characters.
Lidell Hart, the one who wrote the book where everything happens
Yu Tsun, main character of story, is being persecuted by Richard Madden who is in a way pushing him to making decisions quickly, that in the story’s sense, pushes him into one of the many “bifurcaciones” but all happen at the same time. Viktor Runeberg is the man Madden killed and in a way represented one of the multiple ways Yu Tsun could end up soon. Yu Tsun’s boss is an influence on every decision Yu Tsun takes. The kids in the train also influence which way he takes. Stephen Albert is there to explain what exactly is happening with Ts'ui Pên’s story.


What other questions does the text of the story prompt you to ask?
Regarding the story I wonder if, because they talked about multiple possibilities happening all at once, Yu Tsun killed Stephen Albert with no remorse at all because he knew it was just one of the multiple realities and in different ones he would live or he would not even know him. I also wonder if Stephen Albert knew what was going to happen and if he wouldn’t be killed but knew what was going to happen, if he would be okay with it because of the labyrinth or if he would panic and forget all about the labyrinth and try to save himself.
In general, I have thought about multiple things happening all at once or as time in a non linear way, where I can be living right now this moment but at the same time every other moment in my life. It made me question whether or not we actually do have a choice or if we are just set in a specific way thinking we have control over our lives when we really don’t because this reality is all we will ever know and the things we do are all we were ever intended to do because we are not in the other different possibilities. I also began to question whether all ways and choices in the end are just a structure but at the end get to the same point and ending.. Or if there is or is not even an ending at all.

Un señor muy viejo con unas alas enormes

Gabriel García Márquez

What are the different ideas that the people have about how to deal with the very old man?
At first Elisenda and Pelayo seem pretty decent when wanting to help the old man but soon act in a very inhumane way buy locking him up.Many people went to see him and threw rocks at the old man hoping he would move or stand up so they could get a better look, others threw food at him as if he were a circus animal in a cage. I think overall nobody treated him as they would treat a human just because they didn’t know what he was. All interactions towards him are very selfish and egocentric. They all want something from him, miracles, money, or the entertainment of the day or prove and show their wisdom by theorizing about it.


How is he treated in the end? (List all the ways) 
The town forgets him and in the house he is treated like the crabs they tried keeping out. Nobody really cares in the end but Elisenda (and probably Pelayo), she doesn’t care in the way that she has a concern for his wellbeing but for her own calm and peace. I think even though she doesn’t mention it she somehow feels responsible for his suffering and would rather not see him to get onto her saily life. I think he constantly is there as a reminder that she could change and help but never does. When he leaves she and Pelayo feel relieved.


What does the church contribute to the story and the old man’s treatment?
They immediately want to catalog him as either celestial and sublime or an animal. As if those were the only two things one can be when one is not a human. Nobody doubts what the church or padre Gonzaga have to say about it. The father gonzora writes higher church authorities for he thinks it is best for them to decide and determine the man’s nature.


Is there any evidence in the text that he is in fact an angel, or any evidence that he is not?
It depends on what an angel really is. His wings make him seem like an angel and that he comes from above but he could also just be a creature never before seen. The way angels are strictly related to religion and myths (which can be nothing but stereotypes) make it hard for one to believe he is an angel when he is described as old, weak, needing rest and overall dirty and sick. Although some miracles such as the blind man growing three new teeth or the man with leprosy growing sunflowers from his wounds are believed to be thanks to the old manwith wings.
Father Gonzaga does not think he is an angel as he “does not speak the language of God” but then again, the sublime and celestial has been mythified around the world.
Father Gonzaga also mentions soon after that it cannot be determined whether he is or he is not an angel by his wings, probably because he knows he nor nobody else could know for certain based on looking at him.


How would you compare this story with Filiberto’s experience with Chac Mool?
It is similar because it is something that does not happen everyday but is still not seen as a huge thing or at least not in the long run. It seems odd for Chac Mool to come to life and for an angel to be in Pelayo’s backyard but they try to seem to go on with their lives. Both situations affected their routines but not really the way they see things.
Both Chac Mool and the Angels have been mythified to the point where people think they know what they do, eat, look like and must be like. So when noth come in different ways and acting differently as expected people do not know how to interact or what to categorize them as.

Use Zamora and Faris' definition of magical realism as a mode that "facilitates the fusion, or coexistence, of possible worlds, spaces, systems that would be irreconcilable in other modes of fiction" and explain how you think this definition might relate to the elements of this story?
I believe that it links both worlds and the man with wings is then tried to be understood from the point of view and world the town lives in. It seems, as I mentioned before, odd for the man with wings to be there but acquires some sort of reality by how people treat him. They do see him as something weird and possibly out of this world but are not as surprised by it like one would expect them to be. After a few days he becomes something ordinary and they even treat him badly around the house and then even feel sorry for him, like they would with any animal or poor man they were to see. He also acquires reality when the doctor checks him and thinks it is so natural and normal: “Resultaban tan naturales en aquel organismo completamente humano, que no podía entender por qué no las tenían también los otros hombres.”

El Desafío

Vargas Llosa. El Desafío
S. Cruz.  Subjetividad Masculina

After reading the final section of Salvador Cruz Sierra's text titled "Subjetividad masculina", consider how Vargas Llosa's text "El desafio" can be read as a representation of this concept as it is described by Cruz Sierra.
Look for details to help: You should closely consider elements of form such as the descriptive language used, the names, the narrative structure and the characters present in the different scenes.
Post to blog.
In El Desafío a great deal of masculine dominance and stereotypes can be read throughout the story. The power and authority of men is implicit as no women are (relevantly) mentioned and is as if all conflicts were about the position each the men fight for within the rank of men (higher position than women). The ones being more “manly” are higher in this vertical sense of power.

In Masculinidades, Salvador Cruz Sierra describes what it means, specifically in latin culture, to be a man and its characteristics attributed to both genders, women and men.
Masculinity consists in a way of social dominance over women based on the sexual differences.
He expreses the hierarchy of men when he said “la masculinidad es un ordenamiento social que posibilita a ciertos sujetos ubicarse en una posición de control, autoridad y privilegios en las relaciones sociales”.
I believe this is the point where terms and certain links begin to intertwine and mix falsely. Being in this category of men comes with authority and being in control, not only over women but possibly everything else around,  because of the system we live in. This is very different but frequently confused to the idea that because one has power or control one is more of a man.
I am a man, therefore I am in control (patriarchal system)
I am in control, therefore I am a man (???) (ideology)

Men are, even though privileged in opportunities, their actions are forever tied and measured in a scale of manliness. “Masculinidad que protesta” was described by Cruz as lower class men, unemployed or working class who have lost most of their dividends, are marginalized and stigmatized.
How does this work? According to Cruz, unequal relations in the interior a group of men makes some of them excersice power over the others. So, even when not in control or complete dominance they are not deprived from their man stereotypes. This can be clearly felt in the story El Desafio, the men there do not belong to a rich or high social class or enjoy the privileges many other men do but are not extent to the fight for control.
This can be interpreted in the story when they want to fight to prove who has control over the other, who is a bigger man. As if, when fighting they are not only fighting for their life but for their masculinity.

Expressing one’s feelings and/or showing emotion has been long considered proper of a woman. Whereas, men who open up are considered femenine, less of a man and homosexuals, the worst offense a “man” could receive. In the story, there is a constant tension and we can perceive how nobody wanted to be in that situation of having a friend or being the one who has to fight “El Cojo”. They are preoccupied for their friend, and it can be fairly assumed Justo is scared of what might happen but does not back down or run away. Right before the fight he reserves and does not say anything that might make him seem vulnerable. Justo does not express his feelings or fear of having to fight “El Cojo” not even with his friends. His friends, similarly try to make him feel safe by trying to look as relaxed and IN CONTROL of their feelings and the situation as much as they could.

Violence, on the other hand, has been seen as an identity element belonging to men. It has been mainly directed towards women but also as war, delinquency, organized crime and fights.
El Desafio is all about this, the violence in relation to how powerful one is. It is mentioned how nobody wants to get in the way of “El Cojo” and even less fight him. We can assume he is a violent man and/or is known to be good at fighting and is therefore respected.

Some phrases supporting these ideas can be found in the story. Most insults or motivation given surrounds manliness.

“Agáchate, pisa firme... Ya, vaya, pórtese como un hombre…”
This is said to Justo right before fighting El Cojo.

“El Cojo es un asco de hombre.”

-¿Eres muy hombre? -gritó el Cojo.
-Más que tú -gritó Justo.

-Ya nos íbamos -dijo.
-Pensábamos que Justito había ido a la comisaría a pedir que lo cuidaran.
(Insulting him and his manliness, as a “man” does not ask for help..)

-Quiero entenderme con un hombre -grité, sin responderle. -No con este muñeco.

Amor

Clarice Lispector

The way Amor is narrated, in a somwhat horizontal experience, is through the actions and what the main character experiences that ends up shaping the whole story.
She describes everything and we soon realize how everything in the story is a drop that creates an ocean and impacts the way in which she sees the world. Animals in her story are not just objects but an interaction that has an impact on her life and how she thinks.

When seing the blind man she is at first disgusted to the point she looks at him as if she hated him. She then mentions she doesn't know how to look at someone or something that can't look back at you, like she would an animal and how that simple reaction and feeling of hers towards the man, which in this case is something not as important and something not being affected or even noticing the woman, have such a big effect on her life. When she enters the garden and begins to relax, she describes the animals and plants dynamics, she describes how they all in a way have their own rythm in just living, being true to their instincts and serving themselves. There is no doubt in what an animal ever does and she begins to be a part of the environment she is, just existing.
These series of events "awaken" her, when she decides to leave the garden she even describes as if she were ashamed of having been there so long and not being at her house where her children and husband await her. The title "love" I think is reflected in the moment she comes home to find her son and she hugs him scared of the outside. She came back because she loves him and says "No dejes que mamá te olvide" as if she were afraid of herself and what she might do if she forgot him. This is a very unromantic kind of love that weare used to seeing protrayed in films or in literature. I believe the events of that day changed the way she saw the world completely and it definetely marked a before and after in her life.

La Noche Boca Arriba

Julio Cortázar

Mariachi

Consider, how do we externalize our internal understanding of our identity on social media (remember we tend to be both sincere and aspirational (less sincere>insincere) in this medium)?

In the profile I included only Julian's basic information. I believe people don't really open up about who they really are. It is not only limited information but disrupted and deranged information. We tend to embelish our lives, our information and omit all bad or anything that could make us seem vulnerable, in this case the education. Another example is, when including the nickname "El Gallito Inglés", he is somehow complying and being part of his sexualization and "manhood" through sexual connotation that began after the fimling of Mariachi Baby Blues, film also included in his profile, even though he does not consider himself an actor and was not entirely sure of making the film before knowing the huge amount of money, success and admiration it would later have. He is overall complying with that people think of him and portraying his role in society. The profile picture is a picture of him in the Mariachi suite and the mariachi hat, not even showing his face entirely as if that were all he really is to the world although he clearly doesn't think that is all he is. When he tries going to the pscychiartist por example, the doctor thinks of him more as his favorite artist than his patient. He includes superficial like like watching "Formula 1" but does not deepen into what it all really means to him and the place it has in his life.

So, even when "real" it is unsincere.
He is not showing what he really believes, how he sees himself, he does not mention his father killing his mother, his wish and love for women with white hair, his issues with Catalina, his lack of formal education, how superficial his relationships are, what he really thinks about Leo nor his relationship with Brenda. I think we are all similar to this with our lives and social media. Giving out our social image rather than our personal one.