The novel Bruised Hibiscus written by Elizabeth Nunez in 1994 was set in Trinidad, where the author was born telling a story of passion, sexual repression, adultery, class conflict, and murder (Adell 679). Nunez (2003) initially opens the book with a situation where a white woman’s body stuffed in a burlap bag surface on ashore and was discovered by a fisherman. This significant for the reason in the Otahiti community, a woman of that status is considered untouchable and/or protected from harm’s way. Moving forward, the readers are introduced to the characters and Rosa and Zuela who once were childhood friends but once witnessing the sexual assault behind a hibiscus bush scars both women and create division between each other. They later reunite
…show more content…
Even though the book was published in 1994, the fact that it is a non-western historical fiction may have resulted in its lack of literary criticism. Sandra Adell (2001) appreciates the novel’s literary contribution in her critical article emphasizing that the publication itself has greatly enriched the rapidly developing field of African diaspora literature” (679). In addition to mentioning that Nunez’s writing technique “never falls into mere reportage for she keeps her distance and lets her imagination and beautiful writing prevail” (Adell 680). Both these statements from Adell (2001) is significant because it highlights how the context from then novel sheds lights on countries and/or cultures that have been transformed that some readers are not aware of. Referring back to the “African Diaspora,” this article explains how the term “dispersal of African peoples to form a distinct, transnational community.” Therefore, Adell (2001) utilizing that term establishes this piece of work as a tool to trace the identity of certain descendants that have gone unrecognized and/or the public is not familiar …show more content…
In addition to highlighting that the content offers “too much commentary and too many descriptive passages…it’s as if she never quite comes to see her characters as more than vehicles for conveying ideas.” Although Giles (2000) response focused on the weakness in the novel into of its strengths, her approach is valid to take into consideration. In the novel, Nunez (2003) does spend time into character development, providing clarify for readers to understand the actions of certain characters that eventually connect to the conclusion of the novel. Even though some readers prefer writers to get to the point, they fail to realize that postcolonial literature does not have a clear sequence of events from beginning to end. Typically, there is a disruption that requires communities to take the time to rebuild. Therefore, Giles (2000) remark highlights the originality of the
Even though the book was published in 1994, the fact that it is a non-western historical fiction may have resulted in its lack of literary criticism. Sandra Adell (2001) appreciates the novel’s literary contribution in her critical article emphasizing that the publication itself has greatly enriched the rapidly developing field of African diaspora literature” (679). In addition to mentioning that Nunez’s writing technique “never falls into mere reportage for she keeps her distance and lets her imagination and beautiful writing prevail” (Adell 680). Both these statements from Adell (2001) is significant because it highlights how the context from then novel sheds lights on countries and/or cultures that have been transformed that some readers are not aware of. Referring back to the “African Diaspora,” this article explains how the term “dispersal of African peoples to form a distinct, transnational community.” Therefore, Adell (2001) utilizing that term establishes this piece of work as a tool to trace the identity of certain descendants that have gone unrecognized and/or the public is not familiar …show more content…
In addition to highlighting that the content offers “too much commentary and too many descriptive passages…it’s as if she never quite comes to see her characters as more than vehicles for conveying ideas.” Although Giles (2000) response focused on the weakness in the novel into of its strengths, her approach is valid to take into consideration. In the novel, Nunez (2003) does spend time into character development, providing clarify for readers to understand the actions of certain characters that eventually connect to the conclusion of the novel. Even though some readers prefer writers to get to the point, they fail to realize that postcolonial literature does not have a clear sequence of events from beginning to end. Typically, there is a disruption that requires communities to take the time to rebuild. Therefore, Giles (2000) remark highlights the originality of the