Hay un silencio. Te digo que no veo bien. Sigue el silencio. O que Ignacio hablaba cada vez menos. Y luego: —Quiero acostarme un rato. Y entonces comienza el doloroso, el terrible discurso del viejo.
|Published (Last):||28 November 2018|
|PDF File Size:||4.30 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||6.61 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
This is a technique typical of Rulfo, who likes to keep certain information from his readers in order to disorient them and make them work to make sense of a story. The father notes that they should soon be getting to the town of Tonaya, which someone told them was just beyond the hill they crossed hours ago. The narrator notes that the son speaks very little, and less and less with time. He also seems to sleep at times or tremble as if he were very cold. We hereby know that something is wrong with Ignacio but we do not know what.
At this point, the relationship between father and son becomes more nuanced. The father again asks Ignacio if he can see or hear anything, to which he responds in the negative. The father observes that Ignacio should be able to hear the dogs barking even thought the lights in the town have been turned off. At the end of the story we finally glimpse the events that brought Ignacio to this point. When the father gets to the first house he leans against the wall. Now that Ignacio is no longer blocking his hearing, the sound of dogs barking.
In a circular fashion, the story ends as it began, with the father words on the inefficacy of Ignacio as a lookout. It can be also be read, however, as an allegory of the problematic relationship of the post-revolutionary period with the idealistic Revolution that preceded it.
The Mexican Revolution was driven by idealism and hope for a great future, particularly one where the poor would receive the land they desired and the economic stability that had previously belonged to corrupt politicians. Many of these hopes were never realized however, since instead of land reform, a new generation of corruption began where previous revolutionaries sold their allegiance to the highest bidder.
Although the allegory is far from obvious, we can see the outlines of this problem in the relationship of Ignacio and his father. These friends could be metaphors for the role of the foreign influences such as the United States that tried to benefit economically from the chaos that followed the Revolution. He feels the strong desire to reject his son, but nevertheless must yield to the urge to save him from mortal danger. Perhaps this could be a sign of the persistence of revolutionary idealism in the face of what is clearly a lost cause.
The political shortcomings of the Revolution and their subsequent repercussions are not treated directly by the story, but are certainly hidden below its surface and emanate out through the dramatic events narrated. The unstated reason is that there is no doctor where the father and son live. With this simple detail, Rulfo manages to work in a persistent problem that the Revolution proposed to vanquish, the basic issues of social security: health care, shelter, employment, education.
As a result, in the most subtle way — and without taking away from the aesthetic value of the work — these stories continue to serve as nagging reminders of how so many promises were broken or forgotten. This quality is supported by the way the story largely consists of dialog between the father and son.
La hibridez cultural europea-mexica en dos cuentos de Juan Rulfo
NO OYES LADRAR A LOS PERROS