La intención de realizar este trabajo ha sido hacer un estudio de Maldito amor (1986) escrito por Rosario Ferré. El objetivo de nuestro estudio ha sido hacer un análisis de los personajes masculinos de la obra a base de la teoría feminista literaria, centrado en las representaciones del machismo. Como resultado de nuestro estudio podemos afirmar que el machismo se manifiesta en los personajes Don Ubaldino, Don Julio Font y Don Arístides. Analizando el personaje de Don Hermenegildo se han encontrado rasgos del machismo, pero también rasgos que van en contra de la definición del hombre macho. Nicolás De la Valle es la figura que rompe con el estereotipo de los otros personajes, ya que no se ha encontrado ningún rasgo del machismo en él.

This dissertation explores the social relations of indebtedness. In this project I read Latinx and Latin American texts not often placed in conversation—Tomás Rivera’s …y no se lo tragó la tierra, Carlos Fuentes’ La Frontera de Cristal, Rosario Ferré’s Maldito Amor, and Angie Cruz’s Let It Rain Coffee—and explore their thematic and formal engagements with debt. I consider the problem of the visibility, representation, and understanding of indebtedness and argue that, to engage with the invisible logic of debt requires engaging the formal logic—the temporal, narratological, and rhetorical features—of the text. Each chapter treats each of these texts as a case study, and analyzes a different historical context and a different form and scale of debt—from the individual and informal in Rivera’s text to the sovereign and neocolonial in Ferré’s. Unlike other scholars who read for representations of high finance, the stock market, and debt relations, I read texts where questions of credit, finance, and the market are represented in subtle ways, attending to how the ideologies that precede debt are negotiated in the intimate spaces of the home and the family. I ask questions like what kind of ideas about the American Dream, family sacrifice, and national progress prop up debt regimes or what ideas about national progress justify sovereign debt to understand the generation and maintenance of an indebted subjectivity, not merely on an institutional and abstract level, but from below. Reading for debt’s logic is not an attempt to expose the latent ideology of the text or how it mimetically reflects reality but rather to show how the text’s critical engagement of related ideologies—those of progress, development, and liberalism—also encode questions related to credit, debt, risk, and loss. The texts I bring together offer a certain comparative, theoretical, and historical value in foregrounding narrative’s ability to generate relationships of debt and expose the literary techniques deployed to conceal debt’s logic. I show how attending to debt in these texts reframe struggles that tend to be thought of in spatial terms—displacement, migration, expropriation, extraction—and help us see them in temporal ones. Unlike engagements of finance and indebtedness that focus on its asocial and alienating qualities, I show how these texts render visible the deeply intimate nature of indebtedness and how debt mechanisms both produce and are produced by social relationships. Throughout the project, I argue that the relations of intimacy—the stories told that produce closeness, the care from which value is extracted for the production of profit, and the relations created between the debtor and the creditor—are the necessary conditions for contemporary debt and finance across the Americas.