Question

I read The House on Mango Street (1984) by Sandra Cisneros when I was in seventh grade, but recently, I recalled the novel and wanted to read it again. When I did, I understood it much more fully and experienced its characters and their stories much more deeply.2The House on Mango Street is not your typical novel. Instead of chapters that lead from one to the next in a chronological, cause-and-effect way, Cisneros writes 47 scenes that, when seen together, are a collage of her childhood in a Latino section of Chicago in the 1960s. Each chapter is self-contained and does not necessarily relate to the one before or after. Some of the scenes are short narratives, such as “A Rice Sandwich” and “Geraldo No Last Name;” others are short descriptions of people, such as “Marin” and “Alicia Who Sees Mice.” Still others are analytical reflections, such as my favorite, “Four Skinny Trees,” about the four trees in their yard that teach Esperanza truths about herself.3These 47 vignettes are like photographs packed in a box; you handle them one by one, notice their details, and then lay them side-by-side to observe their similarities, textures, colors, and meanings. Like the chips of color in a kaleidoscope, they bounce off each other and combine to create a beautiful image. Many of the women mirror each other’s bodies, voices, and families, and the children, including the narrator Esperanza, are all different yet all alike. The community is a family, and we get to flip through the album of its pictures.4Cisneros’s language in this novel is, like poetry, very focused and spare. In fact, I read the book in about two hours, and I read it slowly. Sometimes, I even read a chapter twice, they are so brief, stunning, and packed with meaning. For example, “The snoring, the rain, and Mama’s hair that smells like bread,” captures one moment, but it also captures Esperanza’s entire childhood. Some of the chapters are extremely short descriptions that seem like poems, such as “A House of My Own” and “Those Who Don’t.”5The voice in this novel is different than anything else I’ve ever read. Cisneros explains its source in her Introduction to the 1994 edition: “The voice of Mango Street and all my work was born at one moment, when I realized I was different.” The voice is sometimes happy, sometimes angry, and always musical. The whole book is like a song with many verses.6I especially related to the fact that the novel is about growing up in a poor neighborhood in a big city. Even though the narrator doesn’t have much, she is ambitious and she has a lot of support from her family.  Even though the narrator is surrounded by some bad influences, she perseveres in achieving her dreams. Even though the narrator wants to get away from her home, she also realizes that she wants to carry it with her through her life—and she does. Based upon her experiences, she writes this very successful book that has won awards, been translated into ten different languages, and continues to be read by new generations.7Now that I’ve read The House on Mango Street at age 13 and again at age 18, I think that I will read it again in a few years, and I imagine it will mean even more to me then. Maybe this is because the book is a mirror that each reader holds up to his or her own face. It lets us recognize how we have grown when we read it at different ages.

How does the tone of the text help to convey the author’s impression of the book she has read?

A.
The melancholy tone suggests that the author feels sad about the narrator’s early life.

B.
The admiring tone expresses the author’s new appreciation of the book.

C.
The inquiring tone suggests that the author has questions that were not answered.

D.
The analytical tone expresses the author’s correct understanding of the book.

Answer 1

B. The admiring tone expresses the author’s new appreciation of the book.

The writer repeatedly praises Cisneros’s voice, language, structure, and emotional impact, and describes how re-reading deepened her understanding—showing admiration rather than melancholy, questioning, or merely analytical critique.