Jorge Luis Borges and Gabriel Garcia Marquez are two writers with two completely different writing styles. Marquez portrays a quiet character in his writing, giving a plot in most of his stories that signify one who is poetic and rhythmic on many occasions. He does not seem to be involved in other aspects of life like politics and science as the overview of his book “Love in Times of Cholera by Gabriel Garcia Marquez” predicts. He seems to be a family man, mostly interested in family affairs and love as the building block of the modern family. More often than not, he slips into a gesture of poetry and reveals a soft part of his personality that is not so common to his counterpart Borges. Contrary to this, Borges is up straight. Theoretically inclined, he gives through the form of short stories a piece of what seems to be the order of a certain system of life. He is somewhat philosophical even telling his tales and will give a pinch of wisdom in his speech, just as Shakespeare would do it. The point though in this paper is to find out what common theme there is between the personalities of these two writers even as they do their work.
specifically for you
for only $16.05 $11/page
As an introductory point, it is important to note that even if writers raise the plot of their stories using different styles, moods, and feel in their work, a deep look into the work that they do reveal a lot of similarity in their work. The two books that have been put to study in this essay are completely different, yet on further revelation to what the books are about, one can comprehend from a single point of view that the two writers had some common theme hidden within the literature.
Both stories revolve around some realities that the main characters come face to face with. The writers have managed to bring out the pursuit of the characters to find out what they did not know before. In love in the time of cholera and the theme of the traitor and hero both writers present an awesome twist of love being depicted not only by these characters but also other supporting ones.
An Overview of the Two Books
Marquez is a literary Nobel Prize winner of the 1980s, whose book is ranked as an Oprah favorite reader. The book “Love in the Time of Cholera” has sold over a 36million copies and seems to be a love story that depicts several different aspects of this love. Well, the synopsis is that of a love triangle formed by the three main characters: Florentino, Fermino, and Juvenal. As children, two of the named are seen to be deeply involved with one another in a way that would end up leaving one in a deep trench of “lovesickness” for a grievous fifty years, as he watches the other falling to another’s hands. Florentino gets himself involved in 622 affairs to get a feeling of satisfaction without the love of his life but to no avail. He is soaked in poetry and literature though and this gets him a head start with the ladies. On the other side, Fermino in her early twenties is forced into marriage to Juvenal, a doctor.
Her father who is a mule driver is involved in doing so since he sees a bright future in a relationship like that one and would encourage it with all that he has. This he successfully achieves until the sudden death of Juvenal in his middle ages. In the context of the funeral, Marquez shows how Florentino reveals yet again an undying love for Fermino and this leaves a reader to examine how genuine his love for the girl is, Is it just a move that shows insensitivity, and an all pathetic representation of love, or is it a noble representation of undying love to a girl that he has known and has been involved in since the early stages. This question is vividly answered in the closing stages of the book and the reader ends up approving of the genius that is in Marquez, the writer for an awesome twist of love being depicted not only by these three characters but also their friends, wives, and husbands.
On the other hand, we have a not-so romantically inclined writer in Borges. “Theme of the Traitor and the Hero” is the book in question and is an effective example of what the writer represents. There is a lot of reference to famous names as Julius Cesar and Shakespeare in his writing. The synopsis thereof is that of a young man, Ryan who in his endless exploration in the workings of his great grandfather comes to find out a truth that would eventually get him into a deep sense of a dilemma. The writer keeps the setting in Poland, yet indicates that the actions that are depicted in the story are a representation of what every country goes through. It is not a unique challenge of the given country but it is a realization that the writer seems to depict through the set country.
To the same actions that a country has deemed his great grandfather a great man and a consequent hero, Ryan after a lot of discovery finds out that his grandfather is the country’s traitor. For fear of causing a rebellion and total confusion, Ryan decides to keep quiet and be part of Kilpatrick’s tales.
100% original paper
on any topic
done in as little as
In doing so, Borges tries to bring forth a historical occurrence that takes place in the lives of people who are oppressed. Concerning Julius Caesar’s stories and history, Borges tends to depict that history is parallel: That history tends to repeat its themes in a somewhat different setting. He tries to bring out that the situations that have faced Ryan are not unique. These experiences happen in all kinds of states that undergo a sense of oppression. In addition to these, the writers seem to connect the events well in trying to portray out the different aspects of the story.
Points for Study
One of the biggest differences that can be seen at face value between these two writers is the way that the writers are placing their context. With Marquez, he gives literature and poetry a bigger platform, using a style that gives romance a bigger space, yet, the main agenda behind the writer is not necessarily to depict romance and love. He goes ahead to give the set up of three people who are tied up in a triangle of love. In this triangle, he introduces other characters like Leona, who is Florentino’s platonic lover to drive a point that society is to be given. In essence, the context is just an avenue for the writer to give growth to a deeper agenda that is in mind, thus making it applicable in our day-to-day lives. The writer does not choose to create a mythical or fictional representation as to the context of the book, but a real-life situation that can be applied to any society and culture.
Similarly, Borges uses his context to do the same. His context is a proverbial representation of a greater cause in life. He does not stop at telling a story of a certain “Ryan” but goes ahead to explain what the context is all about. His texts are rich in proverbs and philosophical memes such as one that explains how Kilpatrick was killed in the theatre. He symbolizes the theatre with the city and the actors symbolizing the legions at the time. Using a context that can relate to anyone in any country, the writer gives a good depiction of what goes on in the real world. He wants to hit on the repeated turn of such events like the one Ryan experiences and he chooses this kind of scenario to show this.
The skill of virtualization has been used in both cases to depict a certain message that the writer wants to bring out. Having a poetic inclination to his writing, Marquez decides t make one of his main characters a poet to reveal an aspect of his work. It is said that virtualization always depicts a certain reality of life. It is almost impossible for a character like Florentino to exist in our modern world. His fifty years of undying love is a bit to the end of time. In my thinking, the writer brings an extreme situation like this into the picture to depict the extent to which a few daring people are willing to go to try and secure love from other people.
On the “Theme of a Traitor and a hero” virtualization has been used more directly, seeing as the writer explains what exactly each aspect of the story depicts. He does not leave the reader to give himself a “moral to the story”. He goes ahead to explain how much the crowned heroes of our time, just as in the times of the past have hidden dark secrets within their closets and have also gone to the grave with them. They have been crowned yet the truth about what they do is hidden from the public, mostly so as not to bring about some form of civil unrest. This he explains vividly after he gives an example with Ryan’s story.
The two authors are out rightly experts in symbolism. Marquez is a writer who can be confused as one who is an entertainer. A deep look at what he has portrayed in his book gives an insight into what he has been symbolizing all along. He is in a hidden way giving the different types of love experiences in his plot as he gives the characters different roles in which they are going to advance the various types of love. For example, Florentino and Fermino depict young love, Juvenal and Fermino depict marital love, Florentino and Fermino in another section depict unrequited love and the list goes on and on. A reader will relate to one of these and will come to an understanding as to where his or her stand is when it comes to the love issue. If one is to read the novel just as it is, he misses the mark because there is so much that the reader is trying to say.
Symbolism is the benchmark for Borges’s book. It does not need to be explained further as to what extent he has gone to explain what is going on in the world. It is a perfect representation and does not need much literary analysis to know what the writer is trying to say.
The theme that the two writers possess as they write these two completely different books depicts symbolism. These are two different writers with totally different scopes of literary work. In love in the time of cholera and the theme of the traitor and hero both writers present an awesome twist of love being depicted not only by these characters but also other supporting ones. They are two individuals who are captivating in their different ways but have different writing styles as seen above. In the end, both writers show a strong characteristic that stands out: Symbolism.
They have exploited the use of symbolism to their best while maintaining their different styles in context and also in virtualization.