Lahiri Delivers A Uniquely Normal Novel

            Gogol finishes on a good note. As evidenced in the closing pages of the novel, The Namesake, by Jhumpa Lahiri, Gogol comes full circle. He begins his life as a baby named Gogol in a little house on Pemberton Road in Massachusetts, and the novel ends as him accepting his given name, Gogol, and once again in his bedroom in the house on Pemberton Road. His mother also experiences a similar cycle. Both cycles are representative of their experiences assimilating into America. Gogol is struggling, for the larger part of the book, to find peace within himself. While his mother, Asthima is struggling to allow herself to find comfort in America. While Gogol finds peace with himself, his mother does not. This is to be expected as Gogol was born and raised in America while his mother is native to Calcutta, India. Each character represents different experiences immigrants have.

            Gogol’s experiences are progressively more depressing, particularly with his relationships. Likely the author, Lahiri, is trying to highlight the difficulties that immigrants face when looking for love.

            The Namesake is a uniquely normal book. Many books seek to deliver an overarching moral to the reader, or possibly try to evoke a certain emotion. There are tragedies, comedies, mysteries, dramas, and so on, however The Namesake belongs in a category of its own. It’s quite simply, real life. The author writes with a confident hand and makes no efforts to embellish her writing or speak effusively. Consequently, her writing is shockingly relatable (regardless of our heritage) and easy to read. The novel is reminiscent of a personal journal that the author decided to develop into a book.

            The Namesake illustrates how talented an author Lahiri is, and makes us wonder what kind of literacy masterpiece she could create if she so chose to. As The Namesake is simply superb, relatable writing; Lahiri has the ability co create literature on an epic level.

Romance and Race

The Namesake, by Jhumpa Lahiri, represents assimilation and culture clash. Is it possible to fully integrate into another country and its customs? Can an Indian marry an American? Lahiri illustrates these questions beautifully.

            The novel is quickly coming to an end, and Nikhil is learning. He is learning that he cannot repress the Indian culture that is such a major component of his being, that he must embrace it. Nikhil drifted furthest from this while dating Maxine after graduate school. He even says that is feels like a betrayal of his parents and their culture. Also, he betrays them by electing to spend vacations with Maxine’s family while ignoring his own. This betrayal of Indian culture persists for some time, and during this time Nikhil lives a pampered lifestyle. Time seems to stand still as Nikhil wines and dines on fine Italian food. Until Nikhil’s father dies. His father acts as a catalyst and triggers Nikhil’s reemergence into awareness. He distances himself from Maxine, and grows close to his mother and sister once more. Inevitably, he meets another woman. However, this woman is different for a host of reasons. Their meeting is arranged. Allow me to rephrase that, Nikhil and another woman have an arranged meeting. Suddenly, two people who have grown up resenting their Indian heritage are embracing it. Upon meeting, Nikhil is smitten. He spends money on her carelessly and thinks about her all the time. Within months, they are regularly spending time in each other’s apartments and are a couple. This particular romance differentiates itself from Nikhil’s past ones by being condoned. Indian mothers in The Namesake want their children to have Indian spouses. Not to mention Nikhil’s abrupt obsession with her.

            Thus far, Lahiri seems to be sending a message that it is easier to marry someone with the same background. As for assimilation, both children grew up in America and therefore didn’t have to encounter that problem as much as their parents. Their parents, however, faced enormous trouble assimilating. Perhaps the author will leave this questions open-ended as the story winds to a close, perhaps they will be answered 

What Does A Name Mean To You?

In Jhumpa Lahiri's, "The Namesake," the importance of someone's name and heritage is made evident. Gogol, a dynamic character, eventually reaches an age where he is legally able to change his name. Without hesitation, he does. From his Russian pet name, "Gogol," he becomes, "Nikhil." During the process of changing and adjusting to his new name, Gogol experiences doubt and regret. His first shreds of doubts arise when he undergoes the legal procedure required to change his name. He seems to expect something more ceremonial or exciting, but the process is exceedingly bland. Moreover, it takes Gogol a long while to acclimate to being Nikhil. Gogol is a decidedly non-Indian name, however, he changes his name to an Indian one. Interestingly enough, Gogol decides he doesn't fit in the Indian Association at Yale, even though he has just changed his name so he is able to conform to such a group. In all fairness, Gogol was made uncomfortable for having such a name. During a high school english class, the teacher recounts the pathetic, depressing life of the russian author Nikolai Gogol. The connection between the author and our Indian Gogol (obviously) causes great discomfort for Gogol.

Nikhil encounters the mysterious gender of women as well. It starts with his first kiss in high school, and by chapter 5, Nikhil is dating another girl attending Yale. Alas, the relationship is tumultuous at best. His newfound love departs for a study abroad program in London. Unfortunately for Nikhil, she stays the summer as well. They inevitably split up upon her return. To compound the sadness, a man commits suicide on the train tracks ahead of Nikhil's train. This act is symbolic of many things, particularly poignant for Nikhil's father. Nikhil's father is somewhat distraught upon his return. Death associated with trains evokes deep seeded trauma for Nikhil's father. Consequently, he is thankful upon his son's return.

Thus far, "The Namesake" is a novel exploring the life of the immigrant and assimilation into another culture, especially the America. The juxtaposition of Nikhil, who is thoroughly American and his parents allows for an accurate rendering of the trials and troubles of joining another culture.

Kids, Wear Your Coats

            The protagonist in “The Overcoat,” by Nikolai Gogol, exemplifies a model Russian citizen. During the time when the short story was written, early nineteenth century, the social system in Russia was extraordinarily hierarchal. The strict hierarchy leads to competitiveness amongst the citizens. Our story’s protagonist, Akaky Akakievich, is the ideal citizen because he is devoid of any ambition and is heedless of how he appears in public. Additionally, he is unoriginally unoriginal.

            Akaky’s name is a copy of his father’s and translates to something resembling “crap son of crap on a boot.” Before making any decisions, he has already been set on a very difficult course in life. A course destined for stagnation, and at best, failure.

            Akaky managed to find a career that fits his criteria. His criteria being; requiring no original thinking, linear, planned-out, and simple. A copier. He sits at a desk and copies papers for the duration of his life. After he finishes at work he moves to his shabby apartment where he lives alone and proceeds to copy even more papers for pure pleasure.

            Eventually, Akaky encounters a taste of ambition. At first he is hesitant, but once he sets a new goal for himself he pursues it with zeal. That particular goal is scraping together enough rubles to pay for a new overcoat. As before mentioned, he is initially put-off at the prospect of change (as Akaky fears change) but then he wholeheartedly embraces it. He turns the goal to fund a new overcoat into his singular ambition in life.

            In the type of society Akaky lives in, it is considered normal to covet your superior’s position, while expressing the utmost condescension to those ranked beneath you. Akaky throws this idea upside down by exhibiting a distinctly socialist/communist attitude. He is a worker ant. Akaky is unoriginal, bland, simple, but the kind of man who makes the world go round. 

Shogun

            James Clavell: WWII veteran, prisoner of war, and one of the most renowned writers of the 20^th century. Clavell is an author whose name is spoken with respect. He isn’t by any means the most famous, but he is certainly among the most talented… in every respect. For one, his impeccable research is unparalleled. A scholar on Japanese culture was quoted saying that Clavell’s novel on an Englishman in Japan, Shogun, is, "a virtual encyclopedia of Japanese history and culture; somewhere among those half-million words, one can find a brief description of virtually everything one wanted to know about Japan.”

            It would be easy to say, “he’s a bland historian, there’s nothing different about his books,” but that would be quite a misinformed opinion. The novel has in fact sold many millions of copies and has earned praise from all walks of life. A teenager with dislike for history or/and learning would thoroughly enjoy reading Shogun, and incidentally, become an astute scholar of Japanese culture overnight. On the other end of the spectrum, a scholar of Japanese culture would be reveling in glee.

            The book is set in feudal Japan, year 1600, and takes the reader through the rise of the fictional Toranaga shogunate, which parallels the real Tokugawa shogunate.

            There is only one aspect of the novel that could be criticized, its length. The book is 1,000 pages or so and that length scares some readers off, likely tempering the novel’s success. However, the pages fly by when the reader’s senses are transported to Japan and the length increases the volume of information the reader unwittingly absorbs.

            Often, we say to ourselves, “I haven’t read a good book in a while,” or “there are millions of books, there must be one that I’d love.” Rest assured, Shogun is there.

Things Fall Apart in the Notes From Underground

There has never been a more distressed, troubled anti-hero in all of literature, than the underground man in Notes From Underground. However, it wouldn't be fair to place blame on Fyodor Dostoyevsky as the first line of the novel is "I am a sick man..  I am a spiteful man.  I am a most unpleasant man" (3). The reader is made well aware that the underground man is mentally unstable from the get-go, but awareness does nothing to damper the impact the demented ideas, thoughts, and actions have. Is the goal of the author to produce a work so utterly twisted that the reader is left speechless and clambering for something to say? Where is the literary value? Why would a happy person choose to punish themselves by reading this? These are harsh criticisms, but the underground man would likely agree. The underground man is to his novel as Dwight Schrute is to the Office. Then again, the underground man would agree with anything that inflicts suffering on himself. He compulsively makes himself suffer, and if possible, tyrannizes others to make them suffer as well. He is remarkably adept at both. Ninety nine percent of the time, we read for one of two reasons. We will read to entertain ourselves or read to learn. Notes From Underground manages to accomplish virtually nothing of either, in fact, it has produced the inverse affect. At best, it has infuriated us, at worse, it has pushed a step backwards in intelligence. The author's outrageously extreme, ludicrous way of including legions of completely and utterly extraneous and unnecessary bizarre terms and words has, at best, impeded on our abilities as writers to produce clear, concise language. Furthermore, the underground man's moral compass has been so long broken that he has lost the ability to communicate with other people on a real level. It is as if the lines between literature and reality have been blurred, irreparably so.  After reading, perusing, skimming, researching, and exploring thousands and thousands of pages of writing, it can be said on good authority that the Notes From Underground and its anti-hero protagonist is one of, if not the, most profoundly infuriating novels ever written... Maybe that is what makes it so exceptional. After all,"...the most intense pleasures occur in despair..." 

He Doesn't Get Out Much - The Underground Man

A long time ago, in the nineteenth century, a Russian named Fyodor Dostoevsky wrote a piece of literature that is so compelling and morally acute that it is perhaps one of the most studied pieces of writing ever - Notes From Underground. The story is entirely fictional, but the innately human questions the author asks and attempts to answer in part one of the book are all too real. Initially, the reader is revolted, and a little intrigued, by his style of writing. The writing is radically different from anything else; there is nothing like it. He seems to speak in endless contradictions and riddles, as well as having superfluous syntax, nonetheless, his singularly overly-wordy writing style seems oddly fitting for the ideas that are probed. On occasion, we become introspective. Usually in reaction to an event or emotion, but usually we don't have any idea what is going on with us and don't make the effort to decipher the emotions, motivations, and feelings in their entirety. The underground man does just that, as well as highlight political ideals and struggles in old Russia. This book must be approached with an open mind and a sharp mind. At once, we must open our minds and expand to begin to comprehend the scope of the writing, but also make our minds keen and sharp to interpret the writing. The phrase "method to the madness" most definitely comes from this book. No author is quite so abstract while still managing to remain on point and not succumb to pure folly as Dostoevsky. He brazenly begins his book by degrading himself in the most conspicuous of ways. The underground man says, " I am a sick man... I am a spiteful man. I am an unpleasant man..." (3). It may seem that the beginning is only a melodramatic hook, alas! From the beginning the book deteriorates further into a maelstrom of confusion and madness! The contradictions are abundant, and the soul is depraved.
The following clip accurately depicts the mental state and feelings of the underground man. The behaviors are remarkably similar as well.

"Things Fall Apart," Raises More Questions Than Answers

Africa has many faces. Many in the United States view it as a completely foreign world and many only associate it with poverty, disease, and death. In Europe, many citizens may ignore the people and think solely of the animals and landscape. Dozens of opinions and perspectives are held on Africa as a whole, but each is merely one pixel in a picture. The truth is, a massive continent composed of many countries, all extraordinarily unique, cannot be summarized with a few words. It is just as complex as any other continent in the world, and equally human. Achebe illustrates this in Things Fall Apart. Achebe doesn't attempt to skew perspective by portraying a Lion King style utopia, but instead creates a story of great depth. It is a story where the protagonist may become the guardian and protector of a child of a neighboring village, but kill the same boy three years later. Okonkwo, the protagonist of the story, has weaknesses and strengths that ultimately make him human. "Okonkwo never showed any emotion openly, unless it be the emotion of anger" (28). As the name of the novel suggests, things will fall apart. Already Okonkwo has killed a boy who had been as a son to him; before Okonkwo raised his machete for the fell swing, the boy screamed, "My father, they have killed me!" (61). Okonkwo's answer was the sound of iron. This act proves that Achebe isn't interested in making a fake case about Nigerian people, but instead interested in showing how alike people are. Regardless of what culture a person immerses in, he/she will find people are one and the same. We all feel anger, confusion, sadness, pleasure, joy, excitement, anxiety, and we all do deeds we regret and deeds we pride ourselves on. Achebe reminds the reader of this, whether or not the reader is open-minded or not. It is not an opinion or perspective, but a fact. The title foreshadows events in the book; likely including Okonkwo falling from grace, more people dying, crops withering, tribes dispersing, and foreign influences permeating into tribal life. All these things and much, much more are possible when things fall apart. We are a single race, on a single planet.

Heads or Tails? Chinua Achebe's Response to Joseph Conrad

A single story of a village in Africa. Warnings of a single story. Warnings coming from a Nigerian woman. How does one untangle the levels of moral and ethical complexity to reach right? Chinua Achebe's Things Fall Apart may well have been written as a response to Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness. Considering this, it would be logical to conclude that Achebe is combating the single story Conrad developed in his novel; however, Achebe's novel is another single story... regardless how justified it is. As if it weren't difficult enough to reach the truth behind both works, a woman named Chimamanda Adichie delivered a very contemporary and provocative speech regarding the dangers of releasing but a single story. To illustrate her intentions, if foreigners came to the United States and spent their time exclusively at McDonald's restaurants, the epitome of our cultural failure, they may easily assume all Americans look like rejects from obesity programs. Obviously, this is not the case. To begin to address these delicate ideas, it is necessary to delve into Things Fall Apart, but with knowledge of a single story. Thus far, Achebe's story is compelling but it is also a single story, and seemingly scrutinizing several villages in Africa. Not an epic of wide scope that encompasses all issues and weaves it together into a tight, digestible package. With this knowledge, the logical mind would believe Achebe is instead delivering another single story, in response to Conrad, to present both sides of the coin. If not having listened to Adichie's speech, Things Fall Apart would seem appropriate, yet now not quite as adequate as we would initially have been led to believe. From an objective standpoint (it is quite difficult to judge with a clinical mind as Achebe is an artist, a true master of his craft) it would have been more beneficial for African people if the story written on their behalf would have been more all-encompassing. It seems Achebe stooped to Conrad's level to meet him one-on-one and consequently left readers with the choice to choose which side they want to believe; the interpretation of African people as fundamentally the same as anybody else(morally correct), or the more sinister interpretation of African people as infinitely more barbaric. Achebe knows himself to be a talented author with the most profound of insights into African people and culture, and when considering writing a work of literature that would shake foundational beliefs he as a moral obligation to deliver a story shedding the people he is representing in a beautiful light, but not one of tunnel vision. Opinions will continue of this long standing issue will continue to change, develop, and build as we progress through Things Fall Apart. Do not hesitate to offer your own insights into the dangers of a single story, opinions on Things Fall Apart, or reactions to the ideas expressed here.