<<Biblioteca Digital del Portal<<INTERAMER<<Serie Cultural<<El Río de los Sueños: Aproximaciones Críticas a la Obra de Ana María Shua<<Celebrating Female Sexuality from Adolescence to Maternity in Ana María Shua’s Los amores de Laurita
Colección: INTERAMER
Número: 70
Año: 2001
Autor: Rhonda Dahl Buchanan, Editora
Título: El río de los sueños: Aproximaciones críticas a la obra de Ana María Shua
In This Sex Which Is Not One, Luce Irigaray affirms that
“what remains the most completely prohibited to woman, of course,
is that she should express something of her own sexual pleasure.
[. . .] For in fact feminine pleasure signifies the greatest threat
of all to masculine discourse, represents its most irreducible ‘exteriority,’
or ‘exterritoriality’” (157). Perhaps even more than female sexuality
in general, any sort of maternal sexuality traditionally has been
marginalized, for as Hélène Cixous asserts, “if there’s one thing
that’s been repressed, here’s just the place to find it: in the
taboo of the pregnant woman” (261). Ana María Shua breaks that taboo
in her 1984 novel Los amores de Laurita, a narrative which
serves as the literary representation of one woman’s sexuality from
adolescence to the final stages of pregnancy. Shua takes that which
is exterior or exterritorial to masculine discourse—female sexual
pleasure and maternal sexuality—and makes it central to her text.
In this transgressive and subversive act of writing the pregnant
female body, Shua proffers a fictional exploration of the relationship
between female sexuality and female subjectivity.
In The Mother/Daughter Plot: Narrative, Psychoanalysis, Feminism,
Marianne Hirsch uses the notion of the family romance to “treat
both motherhood and daughterhood as story—as narrative representation
of social and subjective reality and of literary convention” (10).
In this article, I also focus on Shua’s use of motherhood and daughterhood
as story, looking particularly at the ways in which sexuality
is imbricated into that narrative representation of social and subjective
reality and of literary convention. My examination of the novel
demonstrates how Laura’s sexuality and subjectivity are constructed
both by social and subjective reality—realities often humorously
depicted by Shua—and by literary conventions, a construction underlined
by Shua in her depiction of a protagonist who both loves to read
and sees herself in the role of various literary characters throughout
the course of the novel. While Shua’s novel in many ways affirms
and makes central a woman’s sexuality and subjectivity, analysis
of the novel shows how that sexuality and subjectivity have been
always already culturally constructed through prevailing discourses
about female sexuality and maternity, prevailing discourses frequently
passed on from mothers to daughters.
Until the last couple of decades, the mother has been studied
mostly from “an Other’s point of view,” as E. Ann Kaplan points
out on her work on motherhood and representation (3). Kaplan delineates
three main types of discursive mothers in her study: the mother
in her socially constructed, institutional role; the mother in the
unconscious, first articulated by Freud as the split mother; and
the mother in fictional texts, a mother who is produced by the tensions
between the first two discursive spheres (6-7). In justifying her
own study, Kaplan argues that no one has answered Julia Kristeva’s
question, “What is it about this representation (of the patriarchal
or Christian Maternal) that fails to account of what woman might
say or want of the Maternal. . .?” (101, qtd. in Kaplan 4). Kaplan
further points out that the “lack of cultural discourses setting
forth women’s subjective pleasures in mothering (apart from
such pleasures taking place under the auspices of the Father or
the state)” still has not been adequately studied (4). Ana María
Shua’s Los amores de Laurita is a literary discourse that,
in part, represents women’s subjective pleasures in the maternal
experience of pregnancy.
Shua composes the narrative text of two interwoven parts: one
day in the married Laura’s life in her ninth month of pregnancy
interspersed with various episodes of the adolescent Laurita’s life
and love affairs. The chapters alternate: the two-to-three page
sections dealing with Laura’s day have no titles while the longer
chapters on Laurita are numbered and titled in a style reminiscent
of many eighteenth-and nineteenth-century narratives.
The duality inherent in the novel’s structure emphasizes not
only Laura’s dual role as daughter and mother, but also the dual
character often seen as part of the feminine condition. Irigaray
argues that woman “is neither one nor two. Rigorously speaking,
she cannot be identified either as one person or as two. She resists
all adequate definition” (26). Other critics and theorists make
similar arguments about the pregnant woman, emphasizing the perplexing
intersubjectivity of pregnancy, the radical challenge to notions
about identity and difference that Julia Kristeva sees as inherent
in the maternal condition. As Mary Ann Doane explains:
The maternal space is ‘a place both double and foreign.’ In
its internalisation of heterogeneity, an otherness within the self,
motherhood deconstructs certain conceptual boundaries. Kristeva
delineates the maternal through the assertion, ‘In a body there
is grafted, unmasterable, an other.’ The confusion of identities
threatens to collapse a signifying system based on the paternal
law of differentiation. It would seem that the concept of motherhood
automatically throws into question ideas concerning the self, boundaries
between self and other, and hence identity. (170)
With the particular physical condition of maternity, where one
becomes two or two are housed in one, questions of subjectivity
are especially problematic. Shua’s intermixing of the short sections
on the pregnant Laura with the chapters on the adolescent Laurita
highlights questions of the continuity of self and identity as well
as concerns about the boundaries between self and other.
The novel begins with Laura in her doctor’s office for a pre-natal
checkup.1 That the opening focalization is not through
Laura, but through her male obstretrician (“Desde hace dos semanas
ha resuelto abstenerse de fumar mientras sus pacientes estén en
el consultorio” [9]) reflects what Tess Cosslett notes and critiques
in prevailing medical discourses, the tendency of male medical practitioners
to place themselves at the center of the discourse, to take control
of the childbirth scene, of the birthing woman’s body and emotions.2
Having the original focalization be through the eyes of the doctor
also means that the first presentation of Laura is one constructed
through the male gaze, as a sexual object: “A pesar de su vientre
voluminoso y de sus piernas levemente edematizadas, la señora Laura
se mueve con agilidad” (9). Her husband also sees her as a sexual
being, for he “se deja seducir por la engañosa dulzura de la cara
de su mujer, esa suavidad fingida por la hinchazón de los labios,
la falta de ángulos, el brillo de la piel y de los ojos” (10). “[L]a
engañosa dulzura,” “esa suavidad fingida”—the language
implies that her sexuality is feigned, deceitful, perhaps a snare
for the male, a reading that resonates with the short passages that
introduce the novel, passages that set up woman as a spider who
traps and eats males.3
In a conversation with her unnamed husband4 that
stresses the cyclical nature of women’s lives and experiences, Laura
places herself quite consciously into a line of mothers and daughters
as she comments on the much more thorough medical care she is receiving
in comparison to her mother, who saw a doctor infrequently toward
the end of the pregnancy, and her grandmother, who did not see the
midwife until the pains had begun. She recalls that her grandmother
was sixteen when Laura’s father was born.
The narrative breaks there to begin again on the next page as
“I. DIECISEIS: En que Laurita cumple por última vez dieciséis
años” (13). As she awakens, her mother comes in with her birthday
present, a black leather purse, and a lesson on what being a woman
entails.
—Gracias mamá, pero sabés que yo no uso cartera. Me pongo todo
en los bolsillos o llevo un bolso.
—Hacés mal —su madre fue tajante—. Una mujer tiene que usar
cartera. Una linda cartera haciendo juego con los zapatos. Es lo
mínimo que se puede pretender de una mujer: que sea elegante. (16)
Thus from the first of the Laurita chapters, we are presented
with the prescriptive social discourse of what it means to be female,
a lesson being passed forcefully on from mother to daughter. We
see the lesson received ambiguously by the daughter, as she both
dreads becoming like her mother and realizes she could never fulfill
the prescriptive role as well as her mother does. Laurita simultaneously
scorns her mother for focusing on the matching of shoes and purse
rather than on the meaning of life and envies her mother for a natural
elegance that Laurita knows she will never have. Nancy Chodorow
might argue that the scene exemplifies her contention that daughters
“experience themselves as overly attached, unindividuated and without
boundaries” in regards to their mothers, an over-attachment that
often leads to overt criticism or rejection of the mother as well
as to an immersion in “intense identification-idealization-object
loves, trying to merge herself with anyone other than her mother”
(137).5
In this first chapter, at sixteen, Laura has already begun this
immersion into other intense identifications, having discovered
a world of sexual pleasure with her steady boyfriend of two years:
Dos años de urgentes abrazos con el ascensor parado entre dos
pisos, de agotadoras caricias en el sofá del living, de lentos placeres
en los pajonales del Tigre, adonde salían a remar los domingos por
la mañana y volvían al caer la tarde, horriblemente picados por
los tábanos. (18)
The apt portrayal of teenaged relationships with physical encounters
in odd places out of the sight of parents is pierced by the ironic
authorial presence—revealed by the introduction of the horseflies—an
authorial presence that in this novel frequently mixes the humorous
with the erotic.
The same ironic humor is present in the description of Laurita’s
mixed emotions—part guilt, part fear, and part excitement—en route
to her first orgy en “II. LA FESTICHOLA: En que Laurita asiste
por primera vez a una verdadera orgía” (43). Katherine Dalsimer
notes that during the transitional period that is female adolescence,
“self-disparagement and grandiosity often coexist, or fluctuate
rapidly, creating a strange Alice-in-Wonderland sense of confusion
and discontinuity” (8). This rapid fluctuation and sense of discontinuity
is apparent in Laurita’s approach to the orgy. On a long, hot bus
ride, Laurita cannot help studying the faces of the other passengers
wondering “si algo en su actitud les estaba revelando que tenía
puesto el diafragma, que le molestaba un poco porque seguramente
(y cómo estar totalmente segura) se lo había colocado mal” (47).
Upon approaching the unfamiliar, seemingly abandoned house, Laurita
further worries that she might have gotten the address wrong and
be about to
encontrarse con un grupo de vagabundos envueltos en trapos,
calentándose (pero el calor era terrible, sin embargo) junto a un
fuego, un grupo de hombres hambrientos que sin duda la violarían
y no era tan malo, después de todo, haber llevado el diafragma puesto.
(48)
Laurita’s teenaged imagination provides her with a stereotypical
image of vagrants warming themselves by a fire, patently ridiculous
in view of the sweltering summer heat. Yet the fantasy serves to
incorporate both the bodily sensations of adolescence and the conflicted
emotional states, with the thought of a potential rape helping to
justify going to the party with her diaphragm in place.6
At the orgy she meets a number of anthropology students—“y Laura
empezaba a preguntarse si no habría después de todo demasiados estudiantes
de antropología para tan pocos indios en este desdichado país” (45)—is
impressed by conversations about Cortázar, San Juan de la Cruz,
Camus, Lewis Carroll, and others, gets drunk, throws up, and finally
ends up on the couch with Sergio:
y se amaron como los incas dibujados en las vasijas arqueológicas
y como los japoneses de ciertos grabados antiguos y como los árabes
de las Mil y Una Noches y como un caballero y una bruja medievales
y sobre todo, aunque no les hubiera gustado tener que admitirlo,
como un muchacho y una chica argentinos, universitarios, de clase
media, en una casa vieja de la calle San Nicolás. (61-62)
Laurita here tries to construct her subjectivity and her sexuality
according to inflated romantic ideals taken from literature, anthropology,
and history, but we again see her inflated notions pierced by Shua’s
ironic humor.
The novel follows this split structure, with a short section
about Laura, followed by a longer chapter on Laurita that takes
its title and theme from a word, idea or image presented in the
last paragraph of the previous section. Thus, although the novel
jumps back and forth between different periods of the protagonist’s
life, the reader finds recurrent motifs, aspects of the protagonist’s
personality that can be traced throughout the sections. As teenager
and as adult, Laura is a markedly sensual person, always aware of
her body and all the sights, sounds, smells, tastes, and tactile
sensations that surround her.7 She take sensual pleasure
in eating, particularly sweets, and many of the sexual encounters
with males throughout the novel follow scenes in cafes or bakeries.
In “V. UN BUEN MUCHACHO DE BUENA FAMILIA: En que Laurita
conoce a un joven médico recibido, de muy buena posición” (121),
Laurita has been sent by her mother to spend a summer at Punta del
Este, “donde había [. . .] tan buen ambiente” (122). Her mother
has insisted on buying her new clothing, and packs it carefully
for Laurita, “como un cazador experimentado que revisa, engrasa
y dispone con cuidado las armas que su hijo deberá aprender a usar
en la próxima partida: Punta del Este, privilegiado coto de caza”
(123). Again, the social construction of femininity is being forcefully
passed from mother to daughter as Laura finds herself being pushed
by her mother to do what her culture considers desirable for women—this
time not just carry a good purse that matches one’s shoes, but marry
a nice Jewish doctor. When at last Kalnicky Kamiansky, a young Jewish
doctor soon-to-be cardiologist, invites Laurita out for a seafood
dinner, she discovers her own “inesperada vocación de puta, un hombre
iba a gastar dinero por el placer de su compañía y eso le gustaba,
le gustaba enormemente” (129-30). Laurita again worries over the
acceptability of her desires and her pleasures. As they kiss after
dinner, Laurita experiences the splitting of identity, a separation
of body and mind:
y Laura había tenido otra vez la oportunidad de asombrarse de
sí misma, de su cuerpo, siempre dispuesta a desear incluso a un
hombre tan radicalmente indeseable como era, para una Laurita, un
Kalnicky Kamiansky apoyándose, casi cardiólogo, sobre su pecho.
Sólo la abstinencia, se decía Laurita, podría justificarle las ganas,
esas ganas generales, mecánicas, que el azar centraba en ese instante
en ese señor desagradable que la besaba con técnica deficiente y
entusiasmo. (132-33)
Although Shua presents a protagonist who enjoys her sensuality,
she also underlines Laura’s continued compulsion to justify her
desires, to compose a discourse that makes her sexuality acceptable.
Irigaray argues that within patriarchal society, “woman’s desire
[. . .] may be recovered only in secret, in hiding, with anxiety
and guilt” (30). Shua depicts Laurita’s feelings of anxiety and
guilt each time she recovers her own desire.
Anxiety and guilt are also evoked in the subtitle of “IV. CIRUGIA
MENOR: En que Laurita acepta y sufre las consequencias del pecado,”
(131) a chapter which narrates Laurita’s experience with an unwanted
pregnancy. After having gone to an abortion clinic, paid, and entered
the room where the procedure is to take place, Laurita changes her
mind. The tale of her hurried exit from the clinic, the proceeding
months, the pregnancy, the wedding plans, the eventual arrival at
the hospital are covered in a few pages of narration leading up
to a birth scene which the reader soon realizes is itself the abortion.
In a chapter that echoes Julio Cortázar’s “La noche boca arriba”
or Jorge Luis Borges’ “El Sur,” the earlier exit from the clinic
and the months of pregnancy are discovered to have been but a flight
of Laurita’s consciousness.
In Women Writing Childbirth: Modern Discourses of Motherhood,
Tess Cosslett looks at both medical and fictional discourses on
childbirth and discusses how the consciousness of a birthing woman,
whether taken from an autobiographical account or from the story
of a fictional character,
involves a process of negotiation with prevailing ideologies
[. . .] whose aim is, I would argue, power: in terms of writing,
the power to take over the story, in terms of childbirth, the power
to control the experience; or, in both cases, the power to protest,
or celebrate, lack of control. (3)
While in Shua’s novel the fictional childbirth scene of Laurita
turns out to be an abortion, both that scene and the narrative of
Laura’s later pregnancy are reflective of many of the concerns noted
by Cosslett, as both Laurita and Laura struggle for power to take
over the story, to control their experiences or, at times, to celebrate
a lack of control in orgasmic experiences that threaten the discursive
limits of the text.
In one of the most erotic (and for some readers, probably disturbing)
chapters, Laurita exerts narrative power in order to control a final
scene with Pablo, her unfaithful boyfriend of three years. When
Pablo admits to a weekend spent with a girl in Córdoba, Laurita
taunts him with the knowledge that she had slept with his friend
Pancho that same weekend, something she says she had always wanted
to do. Pablo insists on details, twisting her arm behind her back
and accompanying each question with a punch in the face until:
Laura, en un estallido de rabia, de dolor y deseo, inventando
a partir del confuso recuerdo de una breve historia que había sucedido
hacía casi un año, una historia cuyo único sentido había sido precisamente
éste, la posibilidad de atesorarla, de convertirla en recuerdo y
en relato, porque, aunque era cierto que le tenía ganas, por Pablo
y para Pablo se había acostado Laura con Panchito, le contó con
placer, Laura, cómo le había acariciado con la lengua, lentamente,
primero las pelotas, y había subido después, desde la raíz hasta
la cabeza, lentamente, con la lengua, antes de ponérselo todo en
la boca. (157)
Laura uses her power as narrator to re-take control of a situation
that had in many ways left her control, as the break-up with Pablo
is not one that she desires. In this scene, she skillfully uses
her lengua (language) to describe to Pablo how she had skillfully
used her lengua (tongue) on Panchito. She meets the physical
violence that Pablo inflicts on her with a sexual discourse that
has its own violent impact on him. After a savage sexual encounter
of their own, which leaves Laurita’s face “manchada de sangre y
semen y mocos y sudor, y negras lágrimas cargadas de pintura” (161),
Laurita insists on the last word in their final goodbye. Just before
she shuts the door, Laurita whispers in Pablo’s ear, “Te olvidaste
de preguntarme. También me la dio por el culo, Panchito” (161).
The scene between Laurita and Pablo is exemplary in its highlighting
of the imbrication of narrative and sexuality that prevades Shua’s
work.
Los amores de Laurita ends with a long chapter that seems
to combine the two interwoven parts of the novel. The chapter is
numbered and titled—“VIII. POR ORDEN DEL MEDICO: En que Laurita
acata fervorosamente las órdenes de su obstetra” (167)—like
the chapters on the adolescent Laurita, but deals with the pregnant
Laura, who is referred to as Laurita in the title but as Laura in
the text of the chapter. The last chapter stands out for its narrative
style—a long interior monologue—and vivid portrayal of a woman’s
sexuality during pregnancy. Laura is at home, alone, thinking about
the doctor’s instructions to massage her breasts and nipples, “con
jabón ahora desde el segundo mes, con los dedos, con una esponja
suave a partir del quinto, al final con un cepillo, cepillito de
bebé, que no lastime, cinco a diez minutos de cada lado, nada de
alcohol” (167).
She thinks about all the weight she has gained, about the dessert
she will make for her husband, and in the same sentence in which
she is thinking through the steps of making the dessert, she jumps
from thinking about whipping the cream to “quién quiere coger con
una panza de ocho meses cumplidos, ya estoy en el noveno, treinta
y ocho semanas es a término, soy una madre, las madres no cogen”
(169). In this section, her own lived reality—the sexual desire
she feels—goes against the culturally-constructed prevailing (and
patriarchal) discourse—“las madres no cogen”.
Noting that at thirty-eight weeks, her baby is full term, thus
making her a mother already, Laura underscores Paula Treichler’s
point that childbirth not only produces a baby, but “simultaneously
transforms the woman into a particular kind of social being, a mother”
(117). Tess Cosslett similarly notes that “[a]s a process in time,
motherhood puts into question a woman’s sense of identity, as her
body changes shape and splits apart, and a new social role is thrust
upon her” (118). Pregnancy already has transformed Laura into a
particular kind of social being, for as she has noted, “[d]esde
que su estado se ha hecho evidente, [. . .] la gente la trata con
una suerte de gentileza compasiva, como si encontrara en una situación
de invalidez parcial” (138). While pregnancy and childbirth may
turn the woman into a new kind of social being, the dual, alternating,
structure of Shua’s narrative allows both continuities and discontinuties
between the self before pregnancy and the self during pregnancy
to be stressed.
When Laura wonders if the doctors will shave her for the delivery,
she remembers how difficult it was to see herself in the mirror
when her pubic hairs were first growing in:
de espaldas al espejo, agacharme, mirar con la cabeza para abajo
por entre las piernas abiertas qué decepción siempre, qué fea y
peluda era mi concha, qué verde era mi valle, qué rara mi cara al
revés, el pelo colgando para abajo, ahora es imposible, hacer contorsiones
con semejante panza [. . .] . (169-170)
This scene explains the cover of Shua’s novel which shows the
backs of two bare female legs, with a woman’s face peeking out between
the legs. The face is upside-down, lips pursed into a small o, with
blonde hair hanging down from the scalp. It is a provocative picture
that startles the viewer into trying to figure out how the body
parts relate. A viewer who proceeds to read the novel arrives at
this scene and recalls the cover photo.
The mirror imagery not only harkens back to early adolescence
when Laurita wanted to see the changes in her body, but may also
prefigure a scene not included in the novel, the childbirth scene.
Some women ask for mirrors either during the birth process so that
they may see the head emerging or after the birth so that they may
look at any resultant stitches. Cosslett cites a home-birth advocate
who opposes the use of mirrors during birth because they remove
the birthing mother from being a participant to being an observer
of the birth (Rothman 177-78, qtd. in Cosslett 134). That the mirror
story is inserted in the narration at a moment when Laura is wondering
whether she will be shaved for delivery would seem to support this
prefiguring.
The mirror scene in the novel can also be read as evocative
of the mirror stage in Jacques Lacan’s psychoanalytic theories.
In Lacan’s theory, the infant sees her/himself in the mirror and
in that mirror image finds a totalizing ideal that organizes and
orients the self. With the mirror stage seen as a crucial turning
point, it is interesting to note that in Los amores de Laurita,
Laurita’s turning point would be when she can see her pubic hairs,
when she can see herself becoming an adult woman, a more fully sexualized
subject. Lacan’s discussion of the mirror phase as one that represents
the transition from the pre-Oedipal stage into the phallic stage,
as one that represents an early realization of subjectivity (a subjectivity
that is a split subjectivity) thus brings up important concerns
with subjectivity, the mother/child relationship, and the fusion/separation
duality, all themes that resonate with my reading of Los amores
de Laurita. Jane Gallop’s observation that “the mirror stage
itself is both an anticipation and a retroaction. . . . It produces
the future through anticipation and the past through retroaction”
(78, 80-81) also reflects the anticipatory and retroactive nature
of this particular mirror scene in Shua’s narrative.
Of course, in Lacan’s theory, the concern is with the realization
of the subjectivity of the child; the mother’s subjectivity, like
her desire, is of no import. But in Shua’s text, the mother’s desire
is paramount. The description of the mirror scene is interspersed
into the steps of making the dessert, “batir la crema, fijarse si
hay bastante azúcar impalpable” (170). The long run-on sentence,
the paratactic structure that refuses to prioritize, valorize or
even distinguish between sexual thoughts, memories, and fantasies
and the steps of making the dessert, thus naturalizes female sexuality,
makes it a part of everyday reality in the text. A woman’s sexual
pleasure is not exterior to her discourse nor does it disappear
when she becomes (or is about to become) a mother. That sacred isolation
in which mothers have frequently been placed is destroyed in Shua’s
text.
The long run-on sentence that mixes the making of the dessert
with the sexual fantasies and thoughts of Laura not only naturalizes
female sexuality but also exemplifies how, within discourse, “a
disruptive excess is possible on the feminine side” (Irigaray 78).
Laura’s thoughts and fantasies disrupt linear discourse, erupt into
excess and ecstasy, threaten the discursive limits of the text.
The novel ends with Laura, alone at home, undressed, reading
erotic literature, examining her pregnant body in the mirror, wondering
if the health of her unborn child will be affected by her sexual
fantasies and her orgasms. This concern with the possible impact
on the fetus of Laura’s sexual activities again demonstrates Irigaray’s
claim that woman’s desire can only be recovered with anxiety and
guilt. For in the married Laura many traces of the teenaged Laurita
remain. When she gives herself an orgasm with the stream of warm
water from the bidet of the bathroom:
Para justificarse, mientras gradúa contra uno de sus muslos
la temperatura y la presión del chorro de agua antes de exponer
a esa lluvia ascendente su delicada zona vulvar, se recuerda la
importancia que todos los manuales adjudican a la higiene, a una
correcta, diaria higiene de los genitales externos de la embarazada.
(194-95)
Just as the adolescent Laurita justified wearing her diaphragm
in case she was raped by vagrants en route to the party, Laura here
rationalizes her orgasm as proper hygiene. Laura feels compelled
to place her lived reality of sexual desire into an acceptable medicalized
discourse of hygienic procedure.
On the last page of the novel, exhausted, Laura naps on her
bed: “Pero en su vientre, enorme, dilatado, alguien ha vuelto a
despertar. Es un feto de sexo femenino, bien formado, con un manojo
de pelo oscuro en la cabeza, que pesa ya más de tres kilos y se
chupa furiosamente su propio dedo pulgar, con ávido deleite” (196).
This last image of the book, of the unborn baby girl sucking her
thumb, takes the reader back to the beginning of the first Laurita
chapter, which begins: “[v]io una forma gigantesca, borrosa, que
no trató de identificar. Después reconoció un dedo, un dedo muy
grande, rodeado de gruesos cables oscuros. Su propio dedo pulgar,
el de su mano derecha” (13). Her thumb, surrounded by some of her
hair, is the at-first-unrecognizable sight Laurita sees when she
wakes up on her sixteenth birthday. That the novel ends with another
female sucking her thumb creates a circular closure that ties the
unborn child to the child her mother once was. That the baby is
sucking furiously, with great delight, shows that this new daughter
will be strong and sensual like her mother. The novel thus offers
a continuum, as Laura goes from daughter to mother of a daughter.
For, in addition to being the literary representation of a woman’s
sexuality, Los amores de Laurita is a story that places mothers
and daughters at the center of inquiry. In revealing the story of
motherhood as the unspeakable plot of Western culture in The
Mother/Daughter Plot, Hirsch asks, “where are the voices of
mothers, where are their experiences with maternal pleasure and
frustration, joy and anger?” (23). Hirsch points out how mothers
and daughters have been ignored in literature and studies “the intersection
of familial structures and structures of plotting, attempting to
place at the center of inquiry mothers and daughters, the female
figures neglected by psychoanalytic theories and submerged in traditional
plot structures” (3). Her aim is “to reframe the familial structures
basic to traditional narrative and the narrative structures
basic to traditional conceptions of family, from the perspective
of the feminine and, more controversially, the maternal” (3). Ana
María Shua has structured her novel from the perspective of the
feminine, placed mothers and daughters at the center of inquiry,
and provided a space for the voices of mothers, a textual space
for their experiences with maternal pleasure and frustration.8
The difficulty Laurita had in seeing her sexual organs in the mirror
as a teenager, and the almost impossible task that would be in her
ninth month of pregnancy, can serve in metonymic relation to the
difficulty women writers have had in writing about feminine sexual
pleasure (especially of mothers) in the inherited masculine literary
discourse. Women writers may have to contort themselves to affirm
a feminine erotics which can continue throughout a woman’s life,
but some, like Ana María Shua, are agile enough to do so.