How does Samanta Schweblin illustrates the way society is punished for being limited in her novel

“Fever dream” through the picture of dissemination of water infection?

A premonition that something ominous is already here but you are not able to sense it yet – is a

perfect description of both: an over-caring parent experience, when their child is in danger, and

ecological disasters faced by the planet. It is also a feeling that embraces you overwhelmingly during

the entire process of reading a novel written by Samanta Schweblin “Fever Dream”. She describes

the infection some humans are suffering from, but does not give a straight answer to the question of

when and why and how the sufferers contracted the disease. Nonetheless, the solution to this puzzle

seems to be the most significant point of the book, which the readers are trying to find out

simultaneously with the main characters. In this essay one of the possible explanations of this

situation will be analyzed. Namely, how It can be seen as an illustration of the way society is

punished for being limited through the picture of dissemination of water infection?

At the beginning of the novel, we can come across a conversation between Amanda, who has just

come to the new city to take some rest with her child, and David, a “no longer” son of Amanda’s new

friend – Carla. Already at this point it becomes obvious that Amanda appears to be a sole omnivorous

narrator, from whose perspective the story is presented to the readers. Therefore, each new piece of

information the reader gets is her biased opinion, vividly displaying the boundaries and limitations of

a human mind. As the plot of the book is intentionally limited and prejudiced, in the same way some

individuals establish borders in their minds and do not let anything to sneak through them.

One of the examples of such a boundary mentioned in “Fever Dream” is “rescue distance”. This

notion is continuously used throughout the whole novel. According to Amanda, it is a variable

distance separating her from her daughter. The implementation of a rescue distance was described

to David by the narrator in the following words: “It changes depending on situation. For example, in

the first hours we spend in the vacation house, I wanted Nina close by at all times. I needed to know

how many exits the house had, find areas of the floor with the most splinters, see if the creaky stairs
posed any kind of danger”. It is evidence that in each case Amanda wants to be the only one

controlling the situation and she is vehement about it. (page 43) Undoubtedly, such kind of children’s

excessive protection can be interpreted as an actual addiction. Moreover, it is often egregious for the

offspring since the mind restrictions are transmitted from generation to generation. Under these

circumstances a parent is instilling a kind of “self-fulfilling prophecy” into their child. Amanda

describes her feelings at the moment of decision to come back home like this: “My mother always

said something bad would happen. My mother was sure that sooner or later something bad would

happen, and now I can see it with total clarity, I can feel it coming toward us like a tangible fate,

irreversible.” (page 75)

A possible reason why the author chose to emphasize the narrowness of a human mind through a

picture of a parent-child relationship is the fact that the above-mentioned type of “obsessive

relations” runs widely in modern families.

A sole case of the opposite in the novel happens when Schweblin creates a void in Amandas

motherly instincts by removing her rescue distance from her. “I’m sitting ten inches away from my

daughter, David. There is no rescue distance.” (page 85) – said Amanda. Thus, at the moment of the

lessened and even relieved pressure on the child, eventually the most concealed dread will show

itself. It occurred to Carla: she was afraid of her son being left without a finger, he ended up being

left without a half of his soul. With Amanda: she was afraid of her daughter – Nina – distancing too

far from her. So, the worst came to the worst when they were as close as possible, they were

poisoned. Even with Omar – Carla’s husband: he cared about his horses more than about his son, but

he did not manage to rescue them when they needed it so desperately.

Based on the examples above it is possible to trace a tendency that the ones limited suffer the most.

The reason why this happens is exactly the “important” main characters were looking for. The

narrator wondered: “It is about something else, then? Is it because I did something wrong? Was I a

bad mother? Is it something I caused? The rescue distance.” (page 169) The vital aspect is Amanda’s
manner of suggesting this: whereas the first four sentences are questions, and it means that she

hesitates about them, the last one is a statement and she asserts that it is true. Furthermore, these

lines are a confirmation of theory examined in this essay: characters of “Fever Dream” are punished

for not being able to see beyond their noses, or in Amanda’s case beyond the rescue distance.

Another point of particular interest if the choice of punishment by the author. The most intense

moment in the book is when Amanda and Nina were waiting for Carla near the Sotomayor’s offices.

David states that it is when Amanda had to pay attention and gave a precise description of her feeling

but the reader cannot notice what the boy alludes to. However, with the main character and her

daughter sitting on the grass and getting soaked thanks to the “dew” their affliction started.

Throughout the entire book Amanda tries to analyze the turning point, the inception, the cause

mentioned in the previous paragraph. Following a long discussion with David and a myriad of

speculations, she realizes that it was not dew, but poison. The characters of the book are all united

by a single unique motive - infection, which was transmitted through water. Looking back at history,

the reason that caused one staggering numbers of human deaths is viruses; admittedly, none of

them could emerge from nowhere. So that in the book the “water infection” arises as a symbol of

penalizing individuals for their own actions.

One more question which might arise is, why such an unusual dissemination method as water was

opted by Samanta Schweblin. There are two possible reasons that explain it. First of all, water is the

most common substance in the world, and using it the author wants to show that punishment is

inevitable and it will catch up to humans even if they try to escape, like Amanda trying to leave the

city but not managing. Secondly, water is also the most significant resource needed by people to

survive. So that it is a kind of irony that what gives them live also can take it away.

All the information previously talked about gathers in a pile and leads to one consequence. Dead

animals, wizened fields and forests, contaminated water – all of those are possible to observe in the

book. Moreover, they are a perfectly fitting description of looming ecological catastrophe. In our
reality, an entire humanity is facing it and, unfortunately, each and every one is limited about it. No

one is able to keep their awareness of environmental situation in the whole world while so many

events are occurring around. As a consequence, the majority cares only about their counties’,

regions’, cities’ problems and do not know that others might be experiencing much stronger

influence of them. In the scene when Carla and Amanda are arriving to the house is it possible to

read such a description: “There is no grass around Carla’s house, it’s all earth and dust.” (page 141) It

bears an idea that Carla and Omar were punished not only by the water infection trying to kill their

son and killing horses, but also all the nature they were surrounded by. The most intriguing part

about this is that humans spread the poison on the grass exactly by themselves and are killed with

their own hands. What is it, if not a suicide by its essence?

Samanta Schweblin created a story which comprises two aspects of any compelling reading: the

supernatural tale and the critique of the societal carelessness rooting from people’s ignorance,

indifference, and consumerism. The latter is making it a really thought-provoking piece, able to

change the reader’s perception of the world. In the long run the novel reveals the repercussions of

human actions provided nothing changes in our behaviour patterns. The small city in the book

“dying”, almost already being “dead” embodies our planet and humans destroying themselves

silently, not noticing the imminent end. Can the disaster be averted? – that is a thought worth

considering as an aftertaste.

Word count: 1458