Few books begin with an opening line that affects the reading of the unfolding story, yet this is what would mark a "grabber", a "headline" that is taught in writing. In 100 Years, Marquez opened with a sentence that I have already analyzed for its exposition and imagery:
"Many years later, as he faced the firing squad, Colonel Aureliano Buendia was to remember that distant afternoon when his father took him to discover ice."
As I look back to it, which in fact is looking ahead from where I am in the story which goes into the past, I not only have found that the ice did not hold a reference for climate, but rather is one of many items that the Colonel’s father, Jose Arcadio Buendia, has become interested in in his quest for discovery, but have as well been holding in my mind the character of Aureliano since by writing standards, he has been named as the protagonist in that opening sentence.
Reading of his past, however, I find myself watching him, wanting to understand what brought him to the firing squad of his future, and yet realize that he is overshadowed in his own past by the powerful character of his father. I cannot help but wonder if this is an abuse of writing technique as taught us, or if it is a wonderfully skilled way of letting us know ever so subtly by showing rather than telling us who Aureliano truly is. After all, if I am affected by, can easily understand Jose Arcadio and care for him, would he not have a strong impact on Aureliano as well, regardless of the given facts that he does not appear to be particularly close to Aureliano nor his other children in a usual fatherly manner?
The Lost Children: A Charity Anthology