Every individual is a steward of creation. This is because people protect their property passionately, remembering that God created everything and should be appreciated. However, controversies have concerned the creation history, evolution, and origin. This arises due to the differences in religions and perceptions of creation stories. It varies from ‘there is no God’ to ‘everything belongs to God, including ourselves. Generally, creation is the process of bringing a non-existent thing into existence, mostly described as a unique and supernatural action. Since the controversy describes some human experiences, it has also been featured in literature to reveal to the future generation that the controversy existed long ago. In this regard, Fuentes’ How I Wrote Aura is among the most appropriate literature demonstrating the creation controversy. The main discussion in the How I Wrote Aura is, “Is there creation without tradition? But again, can tradition survive without renewal?” (Fuentes 535). Therefore, the below explains how Aura relates to these questions.
Mostly, creation is believed to occur under a tradition. This is because people witness the birth of their children but still refer to them as God’s creation. In this case, when people are created at different times, they come from nonexistence to existence, which exhibits the life of other people, regardless of meeting them or not. The most appropriate illustration for this claim is the stories of Pushkin, Dickens, and James. First, although the stories come from different times, their mythical settings are similar. “You invariably have three figures: the old woman, the young woman, and the young man” (Fuentes 536). This shows that every family setting must have existed in a different setting regardless of its uniqueness. It follows that interactions in society follow traditions. Also, all the young men in the stories seek secrets held by old women who may take them to the grave at any time if not well sought. This shows that the creation of such insecurities and curiosities cannot occur without traditions. “In all three works, the intruding young man wishes to know the old lady’s secret: the secret of fortune in Pushkin, the secret of love in Dickens, the secret of poetry in James” (Fuentes 536). The text further proves the claim as each level imitates one another per traditions. Therefore, since all the stories come into existence from nothing and independently consist of similar myths, creation cannot occur without traditions.
Second, the creation of a twist of machismo occurs with a corresponding tradition. Generally, masculinity is believed to serve society more than femininity. Any occurrence of a change in this perception is likely to be a new creation since it did not originally exist. “La sefiora Consuelo, Aura and Felipe Montero joined this illustrious company, but with a twist” (Fuentes 536). This seemed a new occurrence in society since it was the least expected, as Filipe was the only one obliged to find the secret. At this moment, the male had changed into deception as machismo could not persist in seeking secrets. “And do not all three ladies descend from Michelet’s medieval sorceress who reserves for herself, be it at the price of death by fire, the secrets of a knowledge forbidden by modern reason” (Fuentes 536). This is proof of the new creation of masculinity perception. However, considering the most appropriate mythical examples of traditions, this story was similar to the case of the Adam and Eve and Doll’s House stories. In this case, Adam requested God “to reduce me to my dust, Desirous to resign, and render back All I received, unable to perform The terms too hard” (Fuentes 536). This shows how Adam was so disappointed by Eve’s actions that they defied machismo. Hence, no creation is without tradition since the twist in masculinity is per mythical stories.
How I Wrote Aura also illustrates whether tradition can survive without renewal. The text claims that if a tradition is not renewed, it will likely remain inactive, and its influence may not be easily recognized. Precisely, tradition renewal means that an older tradition can be integrated into the current human experiences, including when the traditions are modified to fit the context. This includes modification based on their origin and application to maintain the traditions’ objectives in the new context. “I then discovered that the final source of this story was the Chinese tale called “The Biography of Ai’-King,” part of the collection called the Tsien teng sin ho” (Fuentes 536). This shows that originally the tradition was only applicable in the Chinese context but later renewed to fit this context. Besides, its objective and focus remained the same. “Could I, could anyone, go beyond the ‘Biography of Af King’ to the multiple sources, the myriad, bubbling springs in which this final tale lost itself” (Fuentes 536). Thus, despite the changes in the renewal to fit the context’s case, the objective of the Chinese tradition remained the same. “Its constant themes: the supernatural virgin, the fatal woman, the spectral bride, the couple reunited?” (Fuentes 536). Therefore, traditions cannot survive without renewal since it’s one way of integrating them with the cultural and generational changes promoted by literature.
Although all the above explanations support the claim of traditions in the creation and its renewal, How I Wrote Aura Steal depicts are contrary idea. In this case, Maria Callas was expected to align her song and voice creations with the tradition’s expectations. “She was already a young myth” (Fuentes 537). This is because tradition believes that talents get old as time goes on. However, Maria Callas’ story had a different experience. “Yes, she had slimmed down, we all knew it, without losing her glorious and warm voice, the voice of the supreme diva” (Fuentes 538). This shows that her stewardship towards her voice creation differed from how traditions worked. Similarly, she depicted a different perspective on listening to men at her age. Although traditions proved that femininity surpassed masculinity, Maria Callas expressed a different perception. “I really think I have never met a woman who lent more attention to the man she was listening to than Maria Callas” (Fuentes 538). Therefore, all creations occur per the traditions’ expectations.
However, Maria Callas could not escape all traditions despite her age. Generally, most singers had higher tendencies to use vulgar speech and voices as they easily integrated with their audiences. “I had heard Maria Callas sing La Traviata in Mexico City when she and I were more or less the same age, twenty years old perhaps” (Fuentes 538). This confirms that the traditions had recognized the vulgar voices and speeches among the youths as expected. Aura compared his experience with Maria Callas during their twenties and thirty years later. “And in this comparison, I discovered yet another voice, not the slightly vulgar voice of the highly intelligent woman seated at my right” (Fuentes 538). Hence, it is not easy to completely escape tradition in one’s creation as Maria Callas had developed new perceptions in the field, but her voice could remain vulgar.
In conclusion, no creation comes without tradition. Also, the survival chances of a tradition without renewal are minimal. To begin with, the stories of Pushkin, Dickens, and James depict how similar most family settings are to myths. Also, the creation of a twist in masculinity is an imitation of previous traditions. The traditions are common, including in the stories of Adam and Eve and Doll’sHouse. On the other hand, traditions can cross different borders. Their renewal maintains the tradition’s objectives, just like the Chinese tradition used in this context to maintain the themes concerning women. However, this claim does not always hold. This is because Maria Callas could not change her voice and listening skills toward men as per tradition. However, the traditions cannot be escaped completely as Maria Callas could not stop using a vulgar voice. Therefore, no creation occurs without traditional involvement.
Fuentes, Carlos. “How I wrote Aura.” Aura (London: Andr Deutsch) 6188 (1990). https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiR46eF8OT-AhUMXaQEHYuTBnIQFnoECAwQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.worldliteraturetoday.org%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fstatic%2Fdocs%2Farchive-issues%2Fwlt57.4-carlosfuentes.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0Dx0L1nDjP9NjELpDLAVnQ