The truth would seem to be that at bottom Lobato is not a teller of
stories but a critic of men. His vein is distinctly satiric, ironic; he
has the gift of the caricaturist, and that is why so often his tales
run either into sentimentality or into the macabrous. When he tells a
tale of horror, it is not the uncannily graduated art of a Poe, but
rather the thing itself that is horrible. His innate didactic tendency
reveals itself not only in his frankly didactic labours, but in his
habit of prefixing to his tales a philosophical, commentative prelude.
Because he is a well-read, cosmopolitan person, his tales and comments
often possess that worldly significance which no amount of regional
outlook can wholly obscure; but because he is so intent upon sounding
the national note he spoils much of his writing by stepping onto the
pages in his own person.
At his best he suggests the arrival in Brazilian literature of a fresh,
spontaneous, creative power. Tales like _A Modern Torture_ (in which a
rural dabbler in politics, weary of his postal delivery “job,” turns
traitor to the old party and helps elect the new, only to be “rewarded”
with the same old “job”) are rare in any tongue and would not be out
of place in a collection by Chekhov or Twain. Here is humour served
by--and not in the service of--nation, nature and man. Similarly
_Choo-Pan!_ with its humorous opening and gradual progress to the
grim close, shows what can be done when a writer becomes the master
and not the slave of indigenous legend. A comparison of this tale
with a similar one, _The Tree That Kills_, may bring out the author’s
weakness and his strength. In the first, under peculiar circumstances,
a man meets his death through a tree that, according to native belief,
avenges the hewing down of its fellow. In the second, the _Tree That
Kills_ is explained as a sort of preface, then follows a tale of human
beings in which a foster-child, like the _Tree That Kills_, eats his
way into the love of a childless pair, only first to betray the husband
and then, after wearying of the woman, to attempt her life as well.
The first story, besides being well told, is made to appear intimately
Brazilian; the death of the man, who is a sot and has so bungled his
work that the structure was bound to topple over, is natural, and
actual belief in the legend is unnecessary; it colours the tale and
lends atmosphere. _The Tree That Kills_, on the other hand, is merely
another tale of the domestic triangle, no more Brazilian than anything
else, with a twist of retribution at the end that must have appealed
to the preacher hidden in Lobato; the analogy of the foster-son to the
tree is not an integral part of the tale; the story, in fact, is added
to the explanation of the tree parasite and is itself parasitical.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account