Big 4th Post- Theme, Reading, and Recommendation

The most prominent theme in The Namesake by Jhumpa Lahiri is that culture is difficult to maintain when fully immersed into an entirely different one. This was demonstrated through the struggles of the family as a Bengali family from India being quickly thrown into suburban American life, and more specifically, Gogol’s identity conflicts.

There were many minor instances of culture conflict as well as ones that were fundamental to the story. As mentioned in my second post, the snack that Ashima made is a perfect example of a minor situation of maintaining her Indian culture in Cambridge, MA. “She adds salt, lemon juice, thin slices of green chili pepper, wishing there were mustard seed oil to pour into the mix. Ashima has been consuming this concoction throughout her pregnancy, a humble approximation of the snack old for pennies on Calcutta sidewalks and on railway platforms throughout India,” (1). The “wishing” that there were certain ingredients indicates that Ashima is fondly and solemnly thinking of India, missing out on items easily and commonly accessible there. The difference between American and Indian cuisine is amplified in this simple described event.

An example of a culture conflict that ended up being fundamental to the story was the naming of Gogol. This isn’t the reasoning behind the actual name that Ashoke gives to him, but the reason why he had to be named in such a manner in the first place. As a family and Indian tradition, Ashima’s great grandmother was to name him. But her mind slipped away, and the letter never came, so Ashima and Ashoke were left without traditional direction on how to name Gogol. The American conflict here was that the hospital demanded that the baby have a name for the birth certificate entry. The sacred tradition of the way that Ashima and Ashoke would have named Gogol had they been in India was lost to the legal requests of the hospital in America. On top of the haste implemented in response to the demand, Gogol was officially named by a “pet” name. In the described Indian culture, every newborn was given a “good” name which was the formal way to address the child, and a “pet” name which is what loved ones used. As an outcome of the rush to name Gogol out of cultural tradition, he was left without a good name, and this haunted him just as much as any other aspect of his name.

In addition to the instances where Indian culture was slighted by the American environment, the theme was demonstrated through the seamless Americanization of Sonia and Gogol. An example is when they were in Calcutta where they “privately admit to excruciating cravings for hamburgers or a slice of pepperoni pizza,” (84). These clear American staples are just food on the surface of the situation, but uncover something a bit deeper. The children are in India after being accustomed to American living, and they’re secretly revealing that they crave American comforts. This also comes up when they return home to America: “Gogol and Sonia sleep for as long as they want, watch television...once again they are free to quarrel, to tease each other…” (87). The family dynamic adopted here is because of being in America for so long. The social freedom that the children experience in America was restricted in India, so that aspect of cultural family relationships was slowly lost.

I came to understand the theme because of a mixture of prior knowledge and the various instances I gathered directly from the text as I read. The prior knowledge was the familiarity with the classic immigrant story, which was actually expanded upon by Foster. The immigrant story deals with the journey of that move, in this case, the settling of the Gangulis into Cambridge in the first few years. More specifically and commonly repeated, the hardships of the immigration are central to the plot. Through the experiences that Gogol had in his adult life, this pattern of “immigrant hardship” played out through his personal identity issues. Then through examples like the ones described above, my preconceived notion of the theme of the story was repeatedly confirmed.

The biggest things I paid attention to while reading the novel were the wise words of Nabokov and Perrine. I read Nabokov last year and have still continued to struggle with his concept of detached imagination. Up until my AP English education, I honestly believed that certain characters were intended to be identified with, but and slowly coming to terms with how certain aspect of the character should be related to instead of identified with. Luckily for me, The main character, Gogol, was a male immigrant, so I didn’t find myself actually identifying with him. I did, however, relate to him with things like having a name that, as in my third post, is “never an option on key chains or metal pins or refrigerator magnets.” I made sure to try to keep my personal interest out of the plot because of all of the Indian elements that I’m familiar with and so greatly adore. The other thing I paid attention to was symbolism. I’m now so careful with symbolism that I’m almost afraid to declare something a symbol. I traced books, food, and Gogol’s name throughout my reading, but I was careful not to say that they were actual symbols. For each one, I found a counter argument for why that symbol didn’t in fact represent what I would have wanted it to.

I would recommend this book because it’s a well- written, well-orchestrated novel with a “good” story. In all of the symbolism, parallelism, and intertextuality that leads to great analysis exercises, having an interesting plot is just a bonus. I found that in this book, I enjoyed reading it even though it was technically for school. It gives the readers a chance to learn about a culture not commonly approached in all of the “classic” literature. The characters were well developed and dynamic, which is something I always appreciate. I really got to know Gogol because in this book, unlike any other I’ve read (that I can recall) the story follows him from being a fetus to a married and educated adult. Definitely read it if you get the chance.

Gogol's Name

In The Namesake by Jhumpa Lahiri, Gogol’s name is clearly an important element. I’ve traced the events where it’s most central and found an evolution of his name.  

His name is given to him by his father, Ashoke. “With a slight quiver of recognition, as if he’d known it all along, the perfect pet name for his son occurs to Ashoke. He remembers the page crumpled tightly in his fingers...but for the first time he thinks of that moment not with terror, but with gratitude. ‘Hello Gogol,’” (28). The train crash where Ashoke almost lost his life is the event that he is referencing in this quote. Nikolai Gogol is author of the book that Ashoke clutched the pages of in his last lucid moments before revival. He names his son this because of a mental rebirth of the memory, turning it into something that puts his current life into perspective instead of just a dark event where he almost died. So although Gogol’s name doesn’t mean anything as a name itself, it’s a symbol of personal growth and spiritual enlightenment.

When Gogol was little, he didn’t mind his name. “It doesn’t bother him that his name is never an option on key chains or metal pins or refrigerator magnets...After a year of two, the students no longer tease and say ‘Giggle’ or ‘Gargle,’” (66,67). This period in time could be perceived as a “coming to terms” with his name, but in reality, it’s an indifference. It isn’t a direct burden to Gogol, but he isn’t particularly pleased with it either. As a little boy, there weren’t many things of importance that Gogol could have had a serious opinion on. The role of children through the eyes of an adult is to go with the flow of what the parents present to the child. The ambivalence regarding his name soon grows to dislike then to hatred.

Gogol exhibits the hatred he feels towards his own name in various instances during his teenage and young adult life. “He hates having to live with it...day after day, second after second,” “Gogol sounds ludicrous to his ears, lacking dignity or gravity,” (76). The depth of his hatred for his name shows his issues with identity. His rejection of his name, although not Bengali, is a rejection of his Bengali culture and family. His father gave him his name, and it was based on something undeniably sacred to his father, and yet he hates it because it sounds funny in the mouth of an American.

In high school, his name becomes a grand source of humiliation. His English teacher for his junior year is the first person in the book to recognize his name. The teacher proceeds to give the whole class a crude, harsh account of Nikolai Gogol’s life, including how he was paranoid, sickly, and rumored to have died a virgin (88-91). Gogol expresses his embarrassment and discomfort with the information, “each time the name is uttered, he quietly winces,” (91). Even more than the unfortunate information about whom he was named after, this lecture becomes a lasting memory of social and personal agony. The painful memory of this embarrassment coupled with the hated he developed work to create the basis for Gogol’s effective rejection of his name.

Gogol’s contempt for his name lead him to change it. He first changes him name unofficially in order to have a girl he meets, Kim, focus on him instead of his “weird” name. He creates an alter ego with his new name. After kissing Kim, Gogol admits that “it hadn’t been Gogol who kissed Kim...That Gogol had nothing to do with it,” (96). By socially adopting his middle name as his first, Gogol’s creating a new version of himself. His new name was thought to allow Gogol to approach women. His name change boosts the self esteem that he longed for when he was younger. Then, Gogol continues on to legally change his name in a courthouse in Boston. When asked by the judge the reason for his name change, he chooses to share, “‘I hate the name Gogol,’ he says. ‘I’ve always hated it,” (102).

He continues to dislike his name, until he finds a name that he hated even more than his own. When the name hatred surpasses his own, it was a personal conflict with the person whose name defines. His wife reveals that she was having an affair with a man named Dimitri, and Gogol reflected, “And for the first time in his life, another man’s name upset Gogol more than his own, (283). So the evolution of Gogol’s name goes from a wonderful and meaningful name to a hated utterance that is legally denounced, to a final passing of the abhorrent burden to another man’s name.

Food in Ashima's Life

In the book The Namesake by Jhumpa Lahiri, food is a used as indication of emotional distance. At this general point in the book, Ashoke and Ashima have started their family. They  have a little boy named Gogol, they move out to the suburbs, and then Ashima becomes pregnant again.

As books play an important role in Ashoke’s life, food plays an important role in Ashima’s. A recurring pattern of emptiness follows through the various instances of food in Ashima’s life. There’s irony in this pattern because in general, food is the way that something is fulfilled. Whether that “something” be as simple as hunger, as unfortunate as emotional dissatisfaction, or as abstract as sexual desire according to Thomas Foster (How to Read Literature Like a Professor), food is a satisfier.

On the very first page of the book, food begins its role in Ashima’s life. “...Ashima Ganguli stands in the kitchen...combining Rice Krispies and Planters peanuts and chopped red onions in a bowl. She adds salt, lemon juice, thin slices of green chili pepper, wishing there were mustard seed oil to pour into the mix. Ashima has been consuming this concoction throughout her pregnancy, a humble approximation of the snack old for pennies on Calcutta sidewalks and on railway platforms throughout India,” (1). Here, the food is an attempted satisfier because Ashima is trying to recreate the snack she so often enjoyed in her hometown in India. So it’s an emotional fulfillment on top of being just a pregnancy craving. This relationship with food starts the pattern of Lahiri using food as an indicator of emotional “missing” revolving around Ashima. The food central one’s culture will always serve as a token of that culture, and in Ashima’s case, her entire home country where she grew up. With this street snack, Ashima is missing her home and true sense of belonging.

Another example of the emotional emptiness surrounding food in Ashima’s life is when her son, Gogol, misses his mother during her second pregnancy. Ashima gets nauseous at the smell of food while pregnant with Gogol’s sister, so she can no longer cook or eat with Ashoke and Gogol. With Gogol in focus, Lahiri describes, “though his father remembers to mix up the rice and curry for Gogol beforehand, he doesn’t bother to shape it into individual balls the way his mother does...without his mother at the table he does not feel like eating. He keeps wishing, every evening, that she would emerge from the bedroom and sit between him and his father, filling the air with her sari and cardigan smell,” (55). Gogol’s missing his mother at dinner is particularly interesting because it causes the food to evolve as an indicator. In this quote, the dinner is the center or Gogol’s emotional emptiness because he misses the presence and comfort of his mother and the role that she plays in the family. However, the dinner specifically indicates how Gogol feels in respect to his mother instead of just how Ashima feels. This forces the concept of food in the story to encompass Ashima’s character in the general space of emotional distance and emptiness.

Books in Ashoke's Life

The Namesake by Jhumpa Lahiri

The main characters at the beginning of the story are Ashoke and Ashima, husband and wife. They both came from India to the US, Cambridge, MA to be specific, to begin their married life. Ashoke is studying at MIT while Ashima stays home pregnant with their first child, which is the typical construction of an Indian family described in the book. Here, Ashoke is remembering his childhood and his love for books that his grandfather passed on to him. Then he goes on to replay a horrifying accident where his love for books seems to save his life.

"Each day at tea time, as his brothers and sisters played kabadi and cricket outside, Ashoke would go to his grandfather's room, and for an hour his grandfather would read supine on the bed, his ankles crossed and the book propped open on his chest, Ashoke curled at his side," (12). This memory is intimate and humbly indicative of the relationship Ashoke had with his grandfather. Even more, the contrast between what his siblings did and what he did demonstrates his priorities and personality. His brothers and sisters playing games outside is a description that the audience will naturally connect to a scene with little kids running around smiling and laughing, the sun shining, warm weather, and just a delightful, carefree environment in general. That scene contrasted with a little boy lying with his grandfather, snuggled up inside, choosing to listen to a book emphasizes the mellow and raw intimacy of a familial bond. Lahiri does so by conjuring up a personal memory from the audience of special one-on-one time with an older family member. The close relationship that Ashoke has with his grandfather becomes synonymous with his relationship with books.

After a near-fatal train crash, Ashoke was found because "he was still clutching a single page of 'The Overcoat,' crumpled tightly in his fist, and when he raised his hand the wad of paper dropped from his fingers...'The fellow by that book. I saw him move," (18). The deep connection Ashoke formed with the books his grandfather gave to him ends up saving his life in a roundabout way. He could have had anything in his hand during the crash that could have caught the rescuers’ eye, so Lahiri’s conscious decision to make the pages of his grandfather's book the savior makes the books into an even more significant element of Ashoke’s past.

Taking into account the role that books play in Ashoke’s flashback, Lahiri uses them to guide Ashoke’s general character in the story. When he was little, books were essential to his social and intellectual livelihood. Then as a young adult in a life or death situation, the books were essential to his physical life. Using this dynamic, Lahiri continues the role of books into he and Ashima’s married adult life. Books, or education, are what bring Ashoke to the US in the first place, and consequently what bring Ashima there as well. Their family is first generation American because of the priority Ashoke places on education that all began with the love of books from his grandfather.