Eva Luna or the art of kitsch

More than once did I say to myself on reading Eva Luna this is trash, I can't believe I'm reading this, it just gets worse and worse. Yet upon reflection I'm not so sure the novel is as trashy as it seems. As was mentioned in class, the novel exploits from the first chapter almost every possible stereotype the gringo associates with Latin America. Yet the fact that they are so obvious suggests that Allende is consciously manipulating them in a way that playfully brings to light their arbitrary nature. Does this compulsively entertaining fluff also betray a critical element, one that elaborates a pastiche of stereotypes in order to diffuse them? As was also mentioned in class, Eva Luna does possess certain formal qualities characteristic of modernist (highbrow) novels. The independent narratives whose progressive rapprochement drives the novel forward contrasts the staticism of the individual chapters or sections, which have a cuento-like quality in that they stand alone as narrative units in a way similar to the individual episodes of a telenovela. The use of two narrative voices--first person in the case of Eva Luna, third in that of Rolf Carle--could also be considered a clever modernist device, though I found this inconsistant and annoying. The semanic contrast between romantic and political registers is another axis on which the novel is structured. That both end inconclusively points to a anti-ideological postmodernism that favours open-ended resolutions. By conjoining modernist technique with kitch material, the novel seems to subvert the distinction between high and low brow, another aim of postmodernism. That it was published in 1989, when pomo was at its height, would also suggest an afiliation with this movement.