pages the author mentions the fact that several details are disputed over the day that Santiago Nasar is murdered, including the weather and the meaning of his dreams. The narrator even recounts that, "No one was certain [of anything the day of Santiago's murder]" (Márquez 2). Even from the beginning pages, Márquez is able to create a sense bafflement and inquiry in the reader with the information that has been presented to him. Santiago's mother is known to be an "accurate interpreter of other people's dreams" (1) and yet she is unable to recognize his dream as a bad omen. Moreover, Márquez continues these feelings of confusion throughout the story by using a narrator who recounts events after a night of celebration and alcohol consumption; he even goes as far as to admit "he has a very confused memory of the festival" (48). While the narrator seems to fail, Márquez is truly successful in confusing the reader with the question of what information is true and the narrator's inability to provide any reliable information.
Since Márquez chooses to do a first person narration in A Chronicle of a Death Foretold, it limits the flow of possible point of views that the reader may have been aware of throughout the novel. Although he uses a first person narration, Márquez uses different thoughts and memories from many different characters. By using these recollections, the reader is able to see different encounters with Santiago Nasar, however, this continues with the theme of the unreliability of the knowledge the reader receives from the narrator. Many of the characters in the novel begin to contradict one another with their recollections, leaving the question of who has the correct memory. At many times, the narrator offers the reader details without elaborating on them or explaining why they are significant to the case. The narrator gives the reader an example of the inconsistencies when he says that "many people coincided in recalling that it was a radiant morning with a sea breeze... But most agreed that the weather was funeral, with a cloudy, low sky" (2). On the other hand, one could argue that in A Chronicle of a Death Foretold Márquez writes the narrator as someone who is more interested in discovering the reasons
behind the murder then recording factual information, so one most wonder, are the specifics of the day as important?
Usually, journalists and investigators are supposed to remain objective in terms of the case they are investigating. However, Márquez does not do this with the narrator of A Chronicle of a Death Foretold. Instead, the narrator inputs his opinion into the story often, saying "[his] personal opinion is that [Santiago] died without understanding his death" (118). By offering his "personal opinion" (118) it is revealed that the reader is led by a biased investigator when objectivity is vital for success in an investigation. The reader learns that the narrator was a close friend to the victim, Nasar, before his death. Due to this friendship, the reader must speculate if, there is a preconception of Nasar's innocence clouding the narrator's investigation. Additionally, when the narrator provides information to the reader he makes no connections to previous details or establishes why they may be important, as an alternative he offers his opinion on unimportant details. As a result, by using an insufficient narrator, Márquez is able to pinpoint the indeterminateness of a case that has not been investigated in 27 years.
The idea of a chronicle has traditionally been known as an account of events presented in chronological order, however Márquez does not use this customary idea of a chronicle. He instead communicates the events revolving the murder within five chapters by telling the events in this order: the morning of the murder, the months leading up to the murder, the night before the murder (the wedding), the aftermath of the murder, and finally, the murder itself. By withholding the details of the actual murder Márquez builds suspense for his reader. Though the murder scene is not played out for the reader until the last few pages of the novel, Márquez uses foreshadowing to provide anticipation and the idea of importance for an event. The revelation, that Santiago Nasar will die, is disclosed in the first pages of the novel, and by already establishing the idea that Santiago is going to die, the reader is able to use the rest of the novel to
understand why. Another example would be when Guzman disembowels the rabbits in the first chapter, Santiago's horror and disgust is ironic to the reader because, soon enough, this will happen to himself. By retelling the events prior to the murder, the murder, and what happens to characters after the murder, Márquez is able to leave the reader with a sense of completion, although he never reveals main details surrounding the murder, most significantly, if Santiago is guilty of taking the virginity of Angela Vicario.
Márquez creates a complex narrative structure, by using an ambiguous plot he is able to demonstrate how difficult it is investigating a crime of the past. A common phrase used to illustrate putting something back together is fitting the pieces like a puzzle. The narrator attempts "to put a broken mirror of memory back together from so many scattered shards" (5). Those who have dropped a piece of glass know that putting the pieces back together is nearly impossible, the ends are sharp and pieces are sure to have flown to areas one would not look for them. The image of a puzzle is one with perfectly fitted pieces interlocked together cannot correspond with the one of the mirror, distorted and broken. This analogy shows the difficulty of what the narrator is trying to accomplish in A Chronicle of a Death Foretold. Trying to discover the truth of an event nearly 27 years after it occurred is very near impossible. Just as impossible as trying to piece a mirror back together. Additionally, Márquez withholds details from the reader and uses repeated foreshadowing and retells the plot of the story to add anticipation for the reader. By having the narrator use this style and technique of writing, Márquez shows the inability to reassemble the past.
Word Count: 1,329
