Hopscotch Review

Summary/Score: 3/5

5/5 for technical sophistication. 1/5 as a choose-your-own-adventure book. 3/5 overall.

Summary Generated From Outline:

The Paradox of Engagement in Julio Cortázar’s Hopscotch: An Intellectual and Emotional Odyssey

Julio Cortázar’s Hopscotch, a novel that defies traditional narrative structures, has been a subject of mixed reception since its publication. Initially seen as part of the French New Novel or the anti-novel tradition, Cortázar’s work transcends his earlier fascination with the fantastical, as seen in his portrayal of the Minotaur and Theseus in “The Kings” (1949), to explore the bounds of experimental writing. Cortázar’s shift towards an experimental framework reflects his intention to dissect the novel’s objective presentation, urging readers to engage not just with the content but with the form itself, and their perception of the narrative.

At the heart of Hopscotch lies the guiding analysis of “figuras,” a concept embodying an intuitive totality of meaning. This idea, akin to Frank Kermode’s “romantic images,” suggests a synchrony between the novel’s objective presentation and its explicit content, alongside an intuitive connection with the reader. Cortázar presents two pathways through the novel: one linear, catering to readers seeking a straightforward narrative, and another, nonlinear approach, which deconstructs the story even as it unfolds. This dichotomy serves not just as a narrative device but as a commentary on the act of reading itself, challenging readers to choose their path through the text, thereby engaging with the novel on a level that transcends mere plot.

The novel’s central characters, Oliveira, an Argentine immigrant in Paris, and La Maga, his emotive counterpart, epitomize the tension between intellectualism and emotion. Oliveira’s detached analysis of life contrasts sharply with La Maga’s intuitive embrace of the world’s beauty, a dichotomy that propels the narrative forward and underscores the thematic exploration of connection and alienation. The tragedy of La Maga’s child, and Oliveira’s subsequent relationships, including his return to Argentina and the complicated dynamics with Traveler and Talita, further delve into the protagonist’s struggle to reconcile his intellectual detachment with the need for emotional engagement.

However, Cortázar’s ambitious endeavor to encapsulate this tension through the novel’s dual reading paths raises questions about the efficacy of such a structure in achieving a genuine commentary on the interaction between intellect and emotion. While the novel’s format ostensibly offers an interactive experience, inviting readers to navigate through its chapters in a non-linear fashion, this mechanism ultimately falls short of delivering a truly game-like or interactive narrative. The two versions of the story, rather than offering distinct interpretive experiences, converge on a singular narrative trajectory that, despite its innovative presentation, does not fundamentally alter the reader’s engagement with the text’s core themes.

The inclusion of Morelli, a character whose work mirrors the structure of Hopscotch, suggests Cortázar’s metafictional critique of the novel’s own narrative experiment. Morelli’s writings, which contemplate a book akin to Hopscotch, highlight the limitations of such a narrative strategy in fostering a deeper connection with the reader. This self-referential aspect of the novel serves to underscore the inherent contradictions in Cortázar’s attempt to bridge the divide between intellectual abstraction and emotional resonance through structural innovation alone.

In conclusion, while Hopscotch stands as a monumental work in the canon of experimental literature, its attempt to navigate the tension between intellect and emotion through a dual reading experience underscores the challenges of achieving genuine narrative interactivity. Cortázar’s exploration of these themes, though intellectually stimulating, ultimately reveals the limitations of form in capturing the complexities of human experience. The novel, despite its innovative aspirations, highlights the paradox of engagement in literature, where the quest for a deeper connection with the reader may necessitate a return to the very narrative traditions it seeks to transcend.

Original Outline

• Background
  • Reception was mixed, many seeing it as a entry in French New Novel or anti-novel tradition
  • Cortazar started off writing the fantastic: minotaur and theseus
    • “ll to trace, if only in a schematic manner, the path which leads to it. Cortazar’s first book, Los reyes (The Kings, 1949), a set of elegant dramatic dialogues published when he was 35, portrays the Minotaur as a rare, misunderstood hero who is destroyed by a conventional minded, cinema-type hero, Theseus.”
  • Cortazar moved away from this and became more experimental, especially interested in the objective presentation of the novel and how to make it more — “embrace not only character, relationship and setting, but also the book itself, its devices, its sources, and the reader’s perception of it all.”
• Guiding Analysis:
  • “figuras.”: A totality of intuitive meaning
    • “enormous, complex “romantic images,” according to Frank Kermode’s well-known definition: intuitive constellations of meaning which comprise both the trivial and the extraordinary” (View Highlight)
    • The idea is to put in the novel a synchrony of objective presentation, explicit content, while also utilizing the form’s intuitive contact with the reader to create some totality of experience
      • And hence the two readings: 1. for a “female reader”, who wants a readymade story 2. for someone who wants a story deconstructed while it is told at the same time
        • One is basically just the plot, which I’ll get into The other is Cortezar? OIiviera reflecting on the book itself
• Plot/character summary
  • Oliviera is an argentinian immigrant living in Paris with a set of Bohemian friends
  • Oliviera the detached intellectual and his desire for La Maga the intuitive emotive
    • Oliviera reflects on bridges and the nature of connection while la maga makes note of small vital details of beauty
    • La Maga means “the magician” in spanish
    • La Maga’s child falls ill, and eventually dies. Oliviera’s inability to comfort her emotionally leads to their separation
    • Pola — an intellectual alternative to La Maga — leaves Oliviera unfulfilled
  • Oliviera returns to Argentina
    • The new contrast: Oliviera is existentially lost, so he tries to make sense of his past life. In contrast to Traveler and his wife Talita who are stable in their self-understanding
    • Oliviera flees from his intellectual side: working at Traveler’s circus
    • Oliviera starts to see Talita as La Maga
      • Personally, I think this is his projection, but anyway
    • Oliviera has a row with Traveler/Talita and then withdraws into isolation and The Serpent Club
    • But the Serpent Club faces a tragedy that once again calls on Oliviera to be emotionally involved, and he retreats back to obsessing with Talita = La Maga
  • The rest of the book is Oliviera struggling with his relationship with Talita/Traveler and eventually, sort of, taking responsibility? Feeling excused by finding himself? It’s unclear
    • “He starts for a moment to confess to Talita, then rejects the human fold and with draws to his room in the asylum to ward off a presumed assault by Traveler. Going from words to constructions, he barricades himself behind a booby trap of crisscrossed string, pans of water and ball bearings scattered over the floor. The two friends confront each other across the barrier. If Traveler tries to subdue him by force, Oliveira may throw himself out of the window or stand aside and let Traveler fall through. They talk, an understanding is perhaps reached, and Oliveira is left alone, perched on the windowsill, looking down at the others in the courtyard (who probably think he is mad), feeling a momentary sense of benign rapport and also a suspicion that it might be best to dive out and end it all right then and there.”
• Themes
  • Intellectual vs. emotional orientations towards life
    • Oliviera is the intellectual afraid of the emotional
      • First of his identity being subsumed by his affection for La Maga
        • “attracting each other and repelling, as love must do if it is not to end up as calendar art or a pop tune. But love, that word…” #Aphorism
          • They do have moments of simple connection: true Figuras (ch7), but there must also be repulsion — and that is how it inevitably ends
      • Then of the pull towards Talita and the circus community
  • So why then do this in two orders? Why a readymade and a deconstruct?
    • I think a hint is in the discussed work of Morelli — who is essentially writing a book just like hopscotch
    • Games are absurd because of their lack of order (and this is good): ” a comic, anti-climactic, antiesthetic collage devoid of psychology””
    • But is any of this actually a game? Or is it just out of order…

Bibliography

Irby, James E. “Cortázar’s ‘Hopscotch’ and Other Games.” NOVEL: A Forum on Fiction, vol. 1, no. 1, 1967, pp. 64–70. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/1345352. Accessed 27 Feb. 2024.

Cortázar, Julio. Hopscotch. Pantheon Books, 1966.

“Summary Based on User Outline.” Conversation with ChatGPT by Pyrros Rubanis, 26 Feb. 2024.