Saldívar-Hull's Argument: "Woman Hollering Creek" fictionally articulates a Chicana feminism that simultaneously decenters predominantly white feminisms and destabilizes class assumptions.
Saldívar-Hull's Argument does not completely capture what women hollering creek is all about. It does emphasize the social stigma attached to how women are treated it mostly focuses on the bad side of the book. The stories are all different they offer an insight into the author’s soul. Not all the experiences in the book were about women being mistreated. The book personally took me back to my child hood i mean who doesn’t remember as a child being at the church with their grandma that is just something that takes me back. The book talk about Mexican folklore some of their believes such as santito and milagros brujos and hechiceria that is just simply how Mexican live under superstition and to take this and impose it to tie it into feminism and machismo is just not correct. Although she does write about female situation that denote their subjugation to another person by physically or emotionally this should not be assigned to all Mexican women. That type of machista behavior should not be assigned to Mexican men only and cause the assumption that they all are the same because it is not true.
I believe this book goes way beyond creating a strong female image because it relates those life situations that shape you into who you are, which should emphasize that one shouldn’t settle for what they have but go look for their dreams and their happiness.
Very nice, Luis.
ReplyDeleteYou seize on an important absence in S-H's argument: the role of Cisneros' cultivation of a certain kind of nostalgia. What does that nostalgia do, especially with regard to the children? But consider also: why does S-H focus on the story, "Woman Hollering Creek"? Remember that before we can begin to critique an argument or to agree or disagree with what it says, we need to be able to articulate its overall claim and its main points.