Imelda´s Silence by M.G. Díaz

In Trevor´ s novel Fools of Fortune every single character, event and circumstance conspire with silence. The unspoken is the recurrent motif that pervades the story of the Quintons and of those who share their lives from the beginning of the tale right until the end. Even the narrative structure of the novel conveys the idea of a gradually decreasing verbalization of accounts since the different sections of the book show the largest number of pages in the first part and a diminishing number in the folowing sections until we are left with only a few pages in the final part. In this way, silence is the most important – yet invisible – character in the story. A more visible one is Imelda: the mute child that is the offspring of two sinful parents and who becomes the venerated saint of her community, a middle- aged woman who will remain an eternal child. Imelda´ s silence has often been regarded as a sign of her sanctity and her complete devotion to God by many literary critics. It has more than once been perceived as a positive and saintly consequence of her – and her parents´- actions in life. However, as Richard Russell puts forward in his essay “The Tragedy of Imelda´ s Terminal Silence” her muteness “suggests her unhappiness… and her parents´ perverse mythologizing project (which would be part of) the structural trajectory of the novel toward silence.”
Imelda´ s silence can be perceived as a clear sign of her unhappiness mainly because her muteness is a mask for the internal battles that are repeatedly fought in her mind: Imelda´ s childhood was pervaded by the terrible accounts of the tragic events that had taken place at Kilneagh; these images of death and horror were the ones paving the way toward her withdrawal . Then, it is also possible to state that part of that unhappiness disguised by her silence could be attributed to Imelda herself, since her inquisitive nature drove her to constantly read her mother´ s secret diaries and to frequently eavesdrop on other people´ s conversations about how her father had killed Sgt Rudkin in cold blood. Moreover, her inability to speak also suggests an inability to talk things out and make amends with her family´ s past. In addition, she is the end of the line for the Quintons while any possible hint of forgiveness will also die with her. In this way, Trevor leaves us readers with a sense of hopelessness since by now it is clear that the circle of violence started up by Imelda´ s ancestors continues in her since her condition has left her forever frozen in time, endlessly returning to the moment when death struck her family.
Yet, Imelda is not the only one to blame for the unhappiness concealed by her silence since both her parents largely contributed to her condition as well. In the final scene of the novel we can see Willie and Marianne reunited. However, they do not speak about the past; they are simply satisfied to see their daughter in a state they would naively consider as peaceful. They are happy just to be safe from all the pain and suffering that had been present in their lives. They both misread their daughter´ s silence as something sacred, a God- given gift, to avoid confronting the more awkward truth: they are to blame for their tragedies as well. Willie avenged his family´ s death by killing his father´ s and sisters´ murderer while Marianne filled up her daughter´ s head with unnecessary brutal details of their sorrows without feeling remorse or considering the consequences. They might find comfort in their daughter´ s silence as a way of justifying their own sins, but their own actions involve something more perverse than their simply thinking that her muteness is an atonement for their behaviour: Imelda´ s silence reflects their own silence as well. Not a word is spoken about the past when they are reunited in the final scene of the novel. It seems that justifying Imelda´s silence as part of her sanctity is less painful than confronting the fact that neither them has – or will ever be- able to forgive but only to forget.