I read "The Shadow Lines" by Amitav Ghosh and "The Namesake" by Jhumpa Lahiri in close succession in September 2014, with only the latest part of the "Clifton Chronicles" by Jeffrey archer in between, which failed to leave any kind of impression. Hence the urge to draw comparisons between "The Shadow Lines" and "The Namesake" was inevitable. At the outset, there are a number of similarities, given the fact that both the novels are predominantly about characters from Bengali families.It gave me a sense of deja vu'. However, the main difference between the two novels comes from the fact that they are set in the opposite sides of the geographical divide between India and the United States. "The Shadow Lines" begins with the characters living in India, while "The Namesake" is always narrated from the perspective of the diaspora.
If I had to pick a favorite among the two, for me it would be "The Namesake", hands-down. I found Lihiri engaging from Page 1 itself, whereas it took some time for me to actually connect to Ghosh's narrative. However that is not to say "The Shadow Lines" was any less engaging on the whole. I also preferred the clean and neatly executed chronology of Lahiri's story, when Ghosh seemed a little haphazard at times. Lahiri's writing could be
tied in a neat little bow, but Ghosh's mangled chronology was unsettling for me. It felt disconnected. Overall,
"The Namesake" is a pleasant story to read, irrespective of the underlying disconnectedness and uprooted feeling.
However "The Shadow Lines" is intentionally unpleasant, designed to make the reader anticipate the deep underlying
sadness that resulted from the central tragedy.
At the end, it was clear that irrespective of the similarities in the cultural and linguistic setting of the stories, they are about two entirely different themes. Ghosh's loopy writing comes together only in the end. "The Namesake" is about alienation, whereas "The Shadow Lines" is about the meaninglessness of partition in a subcontinent in which people are so culturally similar.
Perhaps, Ghosh's cleverness is manifested in tying the narrative together only in the last couple of pages, where the novel and the title truly make sense. However, in comparison I find that "The Namesake" was beautifully and elegantly executed.
tied in a neat little bow, but Ghosh's mangled chronology was unsettling for me. It felt disconnected. Overall,
"The Namesake" is a pleasant story to read, irrespective of the underlying disconnectedness and uprooted feeling.However "The Shadow Lines" is intentionally unpleasant, designed to make the reader anticipate the deep underlying
sadness that resulted from the central tragedy.
At the end, it was clear that irrespective of the similarities in the cultural and linguistic setting of the stories, they are about two entirely different themes. Ghosh's loopy writing comes together only in the end. "The Namesake" is about alienation, whereas "The Shadow Lines" is about the meaninglessness of partition in a subcontinent in which people are so culturally similar.
Perhaps, Ghosh's cleverness is manifested in tying the narrative together only in the last couple of pages, where the novel and the title truly make sense. However, in comparison I find that "The Namesake" was beautifully and elegantly executed.
No comments:
Post a Comment