The article defines the narrative of the book as being bound to the themes of identity and colonisation, namely the ways in which each character responds to a diversification of both culture and attitudes.
In the perception of the citizens of Macondo and similar tribes such a Riohacha who have not undertaken this ‘diversification’ by Western societies- symbolised by characters such as <PERSON> and <PERSON> this alteration of identity is often presented by <PERSON> as turbulent and aggressive, in which the character undergoing said transition often undergoes turmoil when fluctuating between the conflicting previous culture and new ones.
When inspecting the elements on the novel with regards to this notion, we can analyse <PERSON>’s initial reluctance to speak Spanish- instead deciding to only acknowledge the language of the indigenous people, despite <PERSON> later exposing her fluency in both, as symbolic of her intransigence to the idea of change. The juxtaposition of the ideals of Macondo and <PERSON> become apparent in her initial description in which she carries the bones of her ancestors and eats dirt- of which denotes her rejection of the urban civilisation Macondo is becoming. <PERSON> is even prepared to go to the extent to which she becomes physically ill, having to be force fed by <PERSON>, in order to satisfy her sense of identity.
<PERSON>’ marriage to <PERSON> is defined within the link as a combination of both the Freudian and Quixotic- however while the reasoning is unclear as to what she intended to gain out of her marriage, the fact that <PERSON> description matches that of the man dressed in ‘white linen’ who brings her ‘flowers’ in her dream is undisputed. This idealised cosmopolitan figure can then be attributed the status of the epitome of the ideal of western societal values- having demonstrated his charm, generosity, sophistication, all of which have been absent in the play up to his arrival. The failure of <PERSON> and <PERSON>’s marriage, effectuated by the death of <PERSON>, warrants <PERSON>’s subsequent violent withdrawal, once again reverting to her infatuation with her “ancestral” urges. 285
<PERSON>’s withdrawal, with regards to the symbolism of <PERSON> denotes her disenchantment with Western civilisation and urban civilisation as a whole.
Antecedent to analysing <PERSON>’s relationship with <PERSON> it is important to specify that <PERSON>’s fluctuations and withdrawals have become more aggressive as she ages, with initially her hiding pieces of mud and earth in her pockets to extended periods of isolation whereby she is not seen for weeks. <PERSON>’s relationship with <PERSON> acts as the fulfilment of her current perception of society, his animalistic tendencies and demeanour are prevalent within the novel, yet in her sedentary, rudimentary lifestyle we begin to see a shift in <PERSON> who suddenly begins to once again uptake embroidery and even send letters to the Bishop, both of which posses connotation of refinement and discipline which arguably opposes the “rural” lifestyle she has currently adopted. <PERSON> hints her hatred of animalistic traits referencing ‘her only companion’ to he ‘a pitiless servant woman who killed tiny animals… that got into the house’- voicing her passive aggressive opinions of such actions.
Thus in <PERSON>’s fluctuation we can gain some perspective into a potential reasoning behind the murder of <PERSON>. Within the novel there are a plethora of characters who adopt varied methods to cope with the societal change, whilst some such as <PERSON> completely assimilate the new identity, constantly trying to build and diversify one’s own understanding- ultimately losing both his original identity through extensive alterations and new identity through impracticality and its inability to provide relevance to their current surroundings and infrastructure- thus leaving <PERSON> without an identity, floating through the countless “rooms” of his minds.
<PERSON> who completely embraces the new identity, rejecting his old culture and ideals, and colonel <PERSON> who rejects the new ideals and tries to hold onto the old by fighting for the liberalist movements. Interestingly <PERSON>’s method is the one that is most diverse, she instead adopts both the new western civilisations and the old, however the adoption of one, means the complete rejection of the other and all that symbolise or uphold its values- Thus justifying Her murder of <PERSON>. 285