Laura Esquirel's "Like Water for Chocolate"

I absolutely loved this book! I couldn't put it down! I think that the love story and plot are so enticing, and I love the fictional, magical aspects used throughout the novel. I think the main character, Tita, has such a genuine personality and it's unfortunate that she has to deal with her unfair family traditions.

The love between Tita and Pedro reminded me of Romeo and Juliet, both are young and so infatuated with each other without actually knowing the other person that well. It was shocking to see them actually marry at the end; I didn't expect that their love was true and going to last as long as it did.

How the author, Laura, Esquirel, incorporated a unique recipe in every monthly chapter was interesting because there was always a significance about whatever dish Tita was serving. My two favorite characters in the book were the two cooks, Nacha and Chencha, who I felt cared more about Tita than her own mother did.

There are many examples of love and desire in the book. Tita and Pedro have such a desire for each other; I haven't decided if it was just lust in the beginning or really some connection... I think all the family members loved each other very much but they weren't big on showing emotions; there "Mami" wanted them to never cry so they would look strong.

Anyways, I recommend this book!!

Toni Morrison's "Love"

Toni Morrison doesn't define love in this book because there is no one simple definition. She shows her readers all the aspects of love; how it can be pleasant and how it can be poisonous. Morrison has characters who are seductive and passionate because of love, and others who are broken-hearted and bitter from the most complex human emotion. I find it fascinating how she incorporates all these different forms of love and how it can affect individuals. People are driven by it; everybody wants it, but some throw it away when they really want to protect it.

One way she depicts desire is with a young lustful couple who are obsessed with each other. They're constantly on each other's minds; practically always sexually. They thrive off passion and security. Their desires make them happy. But there is another example of desire littered throughout the story-- the relationship between Heed and Christine. Both constantly want to have the full attention of Bill Cosey. Fighting for the desire to be his "lil Cosey child." This desire eventually drives them insane not knowing who which one he was referring to on his will. Formerly best friends, this desire drives them apart; creates tension and anger; almost death.

Race plays a huge role in the plot. Morrison takes the reader back in history to show what it was like being an African American in a time period when civil rights movement was occuring. And in this time period, Bill Cosey marries an eleven-year-old girl, Heed, when he is in his fifties. I don't know if this was a normal occurence back then, but I think Morrison wrote the story like this to show how he stole her innocence and how "love" was thought of at such a young age-- so oblivious.

This book took me through a tour of love, as if I was walking around in a love grocery store looking at all the different brands that are out there. Some I could relate to, others I couldn't even imagine. I think the point of her book was to show what such a strong emotion can do to your life and how it controls you, and in this case how long it can affect you even if the person is dead and gone.

"The Myth of the Vaginal Orgasm"

While reading Anne Koedt's "The Myth of the Vaginal Orgasm" I noticed some key terms she used throughout her article were frigidity; stimulation; deception; confusion. I typed the word 'frigid' into dictionary.com and was surprised that they actually had this definition: "sexual unresponsiveness (especially of women) and inability to achieve orgasm during intercourse ," along with the other meanings of cold, bitter, etcetera. I thought the wordplay of women not "achieving" an orgasm made it seem like if you don't get an orgasm than you have done the opposite-- failed? I think in her article she was trying to show exactly the opposite of the meaning that dictionary.com provides for frigidity. She was doing women a favor in writing this to explain that if some women don't have consistent orgasms, or none, doesn't mean there's something wrong with them. By using words such as deception, myth and confusion she was letting the audience know that obviously women are being told something other than the truth about their sexual stimulation. I thought it was really interesting how she pointed out that all the "standard" positions are more favorable to the men, and how it is not as equally stimulating for both.

In my own terms, Koedt is saying that women need to know about their bodies; know that there is more to sex than "standard" positions; and you should tell your partner that you want to be treated equally when it comes to climaxing. When she goes on to give reasons of why men maintain the myth of the vaginal orgasm, every excuse/reason had something to do with the male ego, like they just couldn't let women partake in any of the pleasure too or it was all meant for just them. It's disturbing how some cultures even go as far to remove the clitoris so there is not even a chance of pleasure. By providing this information to the audience, in my own terms, she is trying to anger women. You can't write almost 4 pages of why men won't let this myth go and not trying to be instilling anger in somebody.