Thu 29 Oct, 2015 07:58 am
I am writing a paper in literature about Gabriel Garcia Marquez's style of writing (magical realism) and I would like to know if I am on the right track with my thesis statement. Here it is:
"Through magical realism, Garcia Marquez blends reality with fantasy to mirror the political instability of Columbia while condemning social injustice in Latin America. "
Thank you for your help
Habs2611 wrote:the political instability of Columbia
Yes, the political instability is currently increasing in DC.
Colombia, however, is another matter..
@habs2611,
Habs, really well written. Wondering if you're esl
@habs2611,
Quote:"Through magical realism, Garcia Marquez blends reality with fantasy to mirror the political instability of Columbia while condemning social injustice in Latin America."
Sounds fine, but, depending on exactly what you're trying to convey, some word other than "mirror" might be better. Personally, I would have no clue about that. I've never even heard of this author before.
@timur,
Thanks for that link. After reading it, I have a better idea of what is meant by "magical realism," and I like this guy. The summary of one of his short stories presented there is humorous (in a pathetic kinda way).
@layman,
Wonderful author and journalist and man. Not that I knew him, but he is well regarded by many for all three.
I was converted by Love in the Time of Cholera.
Gabriel García Márquez uses the technique of magical realism in his novels as well as his short stories. Marquez uses magical realism to blend reality and fantasy so that the distinction between the two erases.
__________________________
Shouldn't ". . . the distinction between the two erases." be ". . .the distinction between the two vanishes"?
Or, at least ". . . the distinction between the two is erased."
@Glennn,
Quote: Or, at least ". . . the distinction between the two is erased."
Yeah, Glenn, I agree. There is disharmony here between tenses (or something) the way it's written. Sounds like an esl type of phrasing.
@layman,
Thanks. Apparently someone disagrees with us, but lacks the courage to explain their reasoning.