Grade X1 Students are expected to post a comment here by Wednesday September 3rd.
You should write 100-150 words on any aspect of the novel which interests you.
This can include a commentary on a single character, on the plot, on the opening, on the narrative style or any other aspect you choose.
MAMMACHI:
ReplyDeleteWhile reading the novel ‘The God of Small Things,’ I developed a keen interest in one of the background characters of the story, ‘Mammachi.’
Mammachi is the wife late Shri Benaan John Ipe, an entemologist, mother to Ammu and Chacko and grandmother to Rahel, Esthappen and Sophie.
Embodying the stereotypical Indian housewife, Mammachi is extremely tolerant and protective of her family. When her husband grew aggressive on discovering that a moth discovered by him was being named after his nemesis, she quietly tolerated all the beatings he showered on her until her son Chacko confronted his father on finding out about his habit.
Uncommon as it was in the mid 1900’s, Mammachi was an entrepreneur. Mammachi owned and ran ‘Paradise Pickles and Preserves,’ an extremely successful enterprise that made and sold several delicious varieties of pickles, jams and jellies. When Chacko returned to India from England after his father’s death, he sidelined Mammachi in her own business and became the director of the declining company, leaving the subservient Mammachi as a mere supervisor of the production of the pickles and preserves.
As much as Mammachi loved her son, she despised his ex – wife Margaret. Chacko is “the repository of all her womanly feelings. Her Man. Her only Love,” so she feels threatened by the return of Margaret in Chacko’s life who obviously still has feelings for Margaret.
According to me, the Violin playing Mammachi is quite hypocritical and a devout supporter of the Indian caste system. While Mammachi sent her son Chacko to study in England, she denied her daughter of any degree education. Also, both her children were divorced – Mammachi supported all the affairs Chacko had with the pickle factory workers, even had a separate door installed in the house for him and his muse and kept bribing the women in the factory who pleased her son. On the other hand, the one affair that her daughter Ammu with a man of a lower social caste (Velutha) was absolutely unacceptable and a disgrace to Mammachi who along with her sister in law had her daughter locked in a room.
However, Mammachi was a quiet but nice human being. Though it was with several restrictions, Mammachi had allowed the Paravan carpenter Velutha to work in her factory and had even helped his blinding father, Vellya Paapen medically by funding him a glass eye leaving him with a feeling of indebtedness towards her all his life.
Mammachi may not be the most prominent character of the novel but the her actions affect the decisions of characters like Vellya Paapen in the book that certainly direct the course of the events of the story leading to its almost heart breaking truth and climax.
CHARACTER: AMMU IPE
ReplyDeleteAmmu was one very strong minded individual. She opposed the social norms of her time. She had a miserable childhood for her father Pappachi was a grudging martinet. He would beat and berate her a lot. At one point he ‘shred’ her favourite boots for no solid reason.
Pappachi thought that a ‘college education was an unnecessary expense for a girl.’ So, while Chacko was sent to Oxford, Ammu was kept at home. This discrimination made her despondent and she longed to get away.
She convinced her parents to let her spend the summer with an aunt in Calcutta where she married a man she’d known for five days, only to realise later that he was abusive and a ‘full blown alcoholic.’ There came a time where he wanted her to spend the night with his boss in order to keep his job. At this point, she took her two year old twins Rahel and Estha and went back to her parent’s house in Ayemenem. She did not pity herself for her divorce and she knew that ‘for her there would be no more chances.’
She noticed Velutha, a vaishya who served their family, when she saw Rahel embrace him one day. That night she went for a walk and she met him. Realising their mutual attraction, they made love. Ammu was of a higher caste than Velutha. They knew their love would not be accepted publicly so it was kept a secret. They had broken the ‘Love Laws’ which ‘lay down who should be loved, and how, and how much.’ When the affair was caught, Ammu was locked up and Velutha was beaten to death. Ammu was separated from Estha who was ‘Returned’ to Baba. Ammu lived the rest of her life in misery and died at the ‘die-able, viable age of thirty-one’ in a ‘grimy hotel room, alone.’ Her funeral was attended by Rahel and Chacko only.
Hence Ammu had a tragic, disconsolate life. Although she lived a pathetic life, she remained strong and ungovernable till the very end and these fierce qualities made her my favourite character.
Character Analysis: AMMU
ReplyDeleteAmmu isn’t just a mother, she is also Pappachi and Mammachi's daughter and Chacko's younger sister. Through a number of flashbacks in the novel, we get a good sense of how her past helped shape who she is as an adult.
While Chacko is proudly sent off to school and eventually to Oxford to study as a Scholar, Ammu doesn't get the same opportunity. Life at her parents' house is very hard for Ammu. She faces a lot of hardships due to her father who would terrorize her mother and her. Ammu, tired of waiting at home for a husband gets permission to go to Calcutta for the summer. She meets and marries Baba, which turns out to be a very bad decision. After Baba was willing to give her to his boss for one day to secure his job, Ammu divorces Baba and moves back to Ayemenem with her children.
Ammu is both a strict and loving mother. What's interesting about her is her resistance to social norms. She doesn't feel like she needs to be ashamed of her divorce. Instead, she feels like she wasted her best years. This quality sets her apart from the other women of the household, who are completely preoccupied with looking better than others in society. Ammu doesn't think too much of social ranking. In fact, she was of proud that Velutha was spotted at the communist march, figuring that they both find society's norms oppressive and wrong. This doesn't mean that Ammu doesn't care about appearances altogether; she wants her kids to behave well so that everyone can see that a woman on her own can be both independent and a good mother. Ammu's affair with Velutha is a great escape for her, even though she knows their love could never be public. According to me, it's their love that brings about both of their downfalls. Baby Kochamma wouldn't have needed to make up stories about Velutha to the police if they hadn't had an affair. Ammu's life after Velutha's death is unimaginably bad. She had lost the only man she ever loved, and was separated from her kids. She dies alone, in a dirty hotel room. Still, when she is cremated, Rahel doesn't remember her as the disgusting, hacking, slightly loony woman that she ultimately becomes. She remembers her as her loving and devoted mother. I feel sorry for Ammu’s character and I wish that she had a happier life. I truly thing that she is one of the bravest characters in the book.
The God of Small Things is a multi-layered, un-chronologically written, illustration of life. It doesn't start with the beginning and doesn't end with the end. Writing only a hundred words about anything in this novel is nearly impossible. Everything is intwined with everything else and even though when you start the book, you have no idea what's happening, by the end, every loose thread is tied up into one big knot. In fact, towards the end of the book, I was surprised that Arundhati Roy was letting us know things that would actually help put this puzzle together. I expected her to toy with us for much longer, lost in the maze of event and I even felt a little disappointment.
ReplyDeleteArundhati Roy writes about love, loneliness, jealousy, cruelty, politics, corruption, duty, fear. She writes about the love, understanding and comfort between siblings, the importance relationships and how they can be broken. She writes about lust, compassion and risks. She brings up a lot of the problems that were being faced in India at that time and some that still prevail. She brings out the ugly truths of life and doesn't let you ignore them. The book makes you laugh, the book makes you cry. It makes you smile a sad knowing smile. It has that darkness that taints innocence but doesn't destroy it completely.
There are only five characters in the book who's face I didn't want to break and three who I wanted nothing more but to comfort. The book doesn't end on a sad note. It leaves you with a buzzing mind that keeps you awake till 4am. Just look at my failed attempt at writing about one aspect of the book. Certainty and definition aren't isn't strong points.. but then neither are life's.
Theme-Forbidden love
ReplyDelete‘The God Of Small Things’ reflects the powerful, pitiful and pathetic impact that taboos and traditions have on a suppressed society. Focused on the dysfunctionality of the Ipe family, the book uses forbidden love as a central theme to depict both the uncontrollable strength and the weakness of love. Arundhati Roy used what she calls “The love laws”, to create an awareness of the rigid, restrictive and ridiculous perspective in a society which governs “who should be loved, how and by how much”. By emphasizing on the forbidden aspect of love, Roy expresses how societal pressures and expectations not only destroy real love but results in demoralization, devastation and dehumanization. For instance, Baby Kochhama’s unrequited love for Father Mulligan, Velutha’s debarred love for Ammu and Rahel’s incestuous love for Estha. Through these examples, Arundhati Roy accentuates how even in the most suppressed societies, love remains a potent force.
The Relationship Between the Twins:
ReplyDeleteAlthough both twins are equally significant in the novel, we get to know Rahel better, since we primarily see her perspective of the world. As children, Rahel and Estha live in synchrony. Their personalities balance each other out; Estha is serious and intense; Rahel is restless and preoccupied. Rahel's imagination is very different from Estha's. Hers’ is inquisitive and childlike, while Estha is constantly worried about the worst possibilities. An interesting way Arundhati Roy shows us the difference between the twins is by showing us the way they understand Velutha's death. After being forced to tell the inspector that Velutha kidnapped him, Estha tells Rahel, “It wasn’t Velutha, but his long-lost twin.” Even though there’s uncertainty about whether Rahel believes this, we see that she is secure hiding in the bubble of her imgination, while Estha deals with the truth. When Estha is “Returned” after Sophie Mol’s death, he starts shutting the world out and eventually completely stops talking. Although he was always a quiet child, now it is as if he has simply run out of things to say. However, when Rahel comes back to Ayemenem for Estha when he is “Re-returned”, the noise of Rahel’s life is like an intrusion in Estha’s mind. Though they have not seen each other for 23 years, the twins have an innate sense of completing one another. This helps explain why they engage in sexual intercourse at the end of the book. It is a way for them to renew their relationship. Although this idea is troubling for most people, this act is not just a result of the injustice and trauma the twins’ experience but is the author’s effort to parallel Rahel and Estha's sexual reaction to Ammu's radical sexual relation with Velutha. Overall, the twins have a dynamic, complex relationship; “They are like a rare breed of Siamese twins, physically separate but with joint identities.”
In “God of Small Things”, I was most interested by the wholesome encapsulation of class differences and the theme of forbidden love as depicted in the “Love Laws”. The Love Laws state “who should be loved, and how. And how much.” The origin of these laws, itself, are made intriguing by Roy’s belief that man’s sense of exclusivity and superiority existed from the time of the Syrian Bishops, rumored to have arrived in India around the 1st or 2nd Century A.D. The Love Laws, in this novel, mainly refer to the condemned relationship between Ammu and Velutha. Velutha’s death is used as an example of the repercussions of defying The Love Laws. The example of Baby Kochamma as the enforcer of The Love Laws shows their power independent of authoritative bodies like the police or government. An “enforcer” of The Love Laws isn’t a person that points out this unacceptable relationship, but a person who orchestrates the “betrayer’s” payment of karmic dues. The Love Laws aren’t shown to be in control humankind, but rather, a force that has “seeped into Kerala like tea from a teabag”, unstoppably, and uncontrollably. The people of Kerala must obey The Love Laws religiously without question, to avoid any “karmic” revenge. In my opinion, this depicts Roy’s conviction that The Love Laws are as old as the Gods themselves who invented them as meticulously as they enforce them. That God himself has created this hierarchal order of society and enforces class differences for as can be gauged from Velutha’s death, no other power can either administer or execute these laws with equal perfection.
ReplyDeleteOpening to 'The God of Small Things':
ReplyDeleteArundhati Roy, in her novel ‘The God of Small Things’ amalgamates different aspects of the Indian society to give the reader symbolic evidences to create realism. Her enthralling introduction is full of a vivid and in depth description of her setting; the town of Ayemenem in Kerela during ‘a hot and brooding month’ of May.
Roy uses a non-linear writing style shifting from 1969 to 1933, by doing so she faintly outlines the structure of the story and at the same time leaves the reader in the midst of how the respective events took place. An example of this writing style is seen in the portrayal of Sophie Mol’s death. This is primarily a perception of the twins, but leaves the reader in anticipation of how it happened hereby resonating the theme of mortality.
Her multi-perspective style gives a detailed background description of each character, not only entwining the reader into the crucs of the story but also highlighting certain themes. For example, the theme of ‘Society and Class Superiority’ is brought out when Thomas Matthew said, ‘If I were you, I’d go out quietly. Then he tapped her breasts with his baton.’ Here notions of power, gender disparity, and disrespect for a lady who he believes has raised illegitimate children are already articulated by Roy. As a reader, I feel that Roy has very cleverly matted the main core of her story in her opening chapter thus urging the reader to keep on reading and formulate various questions in their minds. She takes hold of the readers mind leaving us spellbound with what is to happen next.
The Relationship between Estha and Rahel:
ReplyDeleteAs young children, the twins thought of themselves together as 'me' and separately as 'us'. Even though they were different, they were the same. Estha was quiet and pensive and in contrast, Rahel was restless and distracted. Together, their different personalities existed in a type of harmony.
"There are things you can't do - like writing letters to a part of yourself. To your feet or hair. Or heart." This line, surfacing from the mind of Rahel, shows us the close relationship between the twins. After Estha is molested, he loses his innocent outlook on life and looks at the world in a different, much more sinister way. This shows us how they are different. Estha views the disturbing things about life that Rahel cannot and in turn, he is protective of her. In the end, Estha is the reason Rahel returns to Ayemenem and even though they haven't seen each other in 23 years, they still have an intimate relationship.
The ‘God Of Small Things’ is written in a non-sequential style, that is the narrative time does not correspond with chronological order.The novel does not follow a conventional pattern form beginning to middle to end. Arundhati Roy uses flashbacks and flash forwards to narrate the story. She subtly shifts into lengthy sidetracks that weave together to tell the story of the Ipe family. Roy gives us fragments and pieces of information, that tell us the fate of the characters beforehand. However, only as we read further do the pieces come together to form the puzzle. The main events of the novel are traced back through the complex history of their causes, and memories are revealed as they relate to each other thematically. Thus the fragmented structure of the novel confuses the readers at first, but towards the end Roy manages to connect the pieces, and every aspect of the novel seems to fit in place. Each ordinary moment becomes more heightened, more poignant because it is viewed through the complex lens of both past and present.
ReplyDeleteThough the novel is loosely grounded in Rahel’s perspective, Roy does not restrict herself to using only one person’s point of view. The novel is written in third person. Using this to her advantage, Roy gives out information about the other characters that would be unknown to others - for example, Baby Kochamma's diaries, Estha's private fears, Velutha and Ammu's long-brewing love. She creates a distinct point of view for the twins by capitalising few of the words and phrases. Roy believes that, “The secret behind Great Stories are that they have no secrets”. This may have influenced her writing.
In conclusion I believe that Roy is a fantastic writer. With her vivid descriptions and use of language, Roy creates her own style of writing. This particularly makes the novel unique as well as outstanding.
In my opinion, the most interesting character in Arundhati Roy’s book, The God of Small Things, is Baby Kochamma. As a girl, she fell in love with Father Mulligan, and despite her father’s disapproval she became a Roman Catholic nun to be closer to him, losing her respect in the family. Her unrequited love made her more and more bitter over the years making her capable of lying and double crossing anyone she considered a threat to her social standing. Throughout the book, Baby Kochamma delights in the misfortune of others and manipulates events to cause distress, specially to Ammu, Rahel and Estha who she detests. She harbours a hatred towards Valutha, who is an untouchable, not only because of his low caste but also because some protestors had made her wave a red flag and recite a communist slogan, humiliating her, and Veluthas alleged connection with the protestors, makes her direct her anger towards him. She lies, and manipulates events to get Velutha beaten to death and to save herself. She is portrayed as very self-centred and arrogant.“In her mind she kept an organised, careful account of Things She’d Done For People, and Things People Hadn't Done For Her”. She also comes across as pretentious, because when Sophie Mol visits, she starts talking in a “strange new British accent”. She is insecure, as she as spent her life unmarried, and as Rahel says “She’s living her life backwards” because “as a young girl she had renounced the material world, and now, as an old woman,she seemed to embrace it.”She feels no remorse for all the pain she causes, because she feels its a small price to pay to save the reputation of her family as she is specially insecure about social status. Baby Kochamma is a shrewd old lady and a master of conspiracy
ReplyDelete