Anti-Feminist Representation Of Women In Cartagena By Nam Le

A close reading of the opening paragraphs of Cartagena illustrates how Nam Le employs an anguished juvenile gaze to excuse the anti-feminist portrayal of women in the story. An adolescent narration grants freedom for sexist representations, and one-dimensional female characterizations, because, as a literary technique, it changes how readers engage with a text. A vulnerable lens is exploited by Le in multiple stories across the entire The Boat collection, functioning to justify all the subpar female characters within them.

In the passage, the language that is used in relation to girls, restricts, dehumanizes, and strips them of value. The stance taken by Le in his first mention of a female character is undisputedly dismissive. It can be

This sentence is put in parentheses, symbolizing it as an afterthought, which serves to further exacerbate the feeling of insignificance such sentiment evokes. This misogynistic attitude is reiterated again in an explicit manner when Le silences the voice of Claudia by cutting her off mid dialogue, “tell us the part –“ (p.31). He then includes a line, Luis is “speaking over Claudia”(p.31), to clarify this, despite it already being seemingly obvious due to use of a hyphen. When Le begins Luis’s description of the women in Cartagena with a common noun, “the girls” (p.31), he eliminates their agency to exist as individuals. After limiting all females to a collective identity, he then sexualizes them by focusing purely on the body in his account, “they wear skirts up to here… and boots up to here” (p.32). Perhaps even more concerning is the glaringly problematic discourse (rich with racism, western ideals and prejudices) that Le bites into with the statement, “they are taller and whiter and have

The crude language, such as “shit-eating faggot” (p.32), and repetitive references to Hollywood made by the boys, “like on MTV”(p.32), and “like in the movies” (p.31), establishes a strong juvenile voice, which in turn alleviates authority from their words. Physical descriptions also serve to highlight their youth. Le mentions Luis’s “greasy hair” (p.31), and defines his moustache as something that appears to be “draw on with wet charcoal” (p.32), which implies that it appears out of place. In Luis’s description of Cartagena at dawn, the repetition of personal pronouns, particularly the phrase “he says” (p.31), suggests that his sentiments are opinions, not facts. Placing this repetitive phrase in a sentence comprised of regular commas produces a fast paced rhythm, with the stacked descriptions creating a poetic, stream of consciousness feeling. Evocative and rich prose has a dreamlike quality to it, which subconsciously works to detach the narrative from a life outside of itself. Lacing Luis’s speech with a soft, ornate tone right from in his opening moments of dialogue defines the affect his voice has throughout the full story. It shapes readers to interpret his words as somewhat fictitious, thus making everything he says feel more inconsequential. The incorporation of ethnic slang into the text, such as he term “gallada”(p.31), also helps to