With the Booker Prize announcement just two days away, American academics weigh in on the nominee who appears to have become the next big Indian crossover novelist.
She’s been shortlisted for the Man Booker Prize. She’s on the longlist
for the National Book Award. Her new novel, The Lowland, has been
reviewed everywhere, from The New York Times to the most obscure little blog.
Few writers of Indian origin command this kind of fanfare in the West,
except perhaps Salman Rushdie. There’s little doubt that Jhumpa Lahiri
is a literary rock star. But is she the next big Indian writer after
Rushdie, in terms of international standing?
Homi K. Bhabha — the Anne F. Rothenberg Professor of English and
American Literature and Language, and the Director of the Mahindra
Humanities Center at Harvard University — is puzzled by this question.
“How are Jhumpa Lahiri or even Salman Rushdie ‘Indian’ writers? That is
not their fundamental experience. If anything, Lahiri is among the
leading writers in English who have a very cosmopolitan experience.”
Bhabha points out that Rushdie moved to London as a schoolboy, studied
at Cambridge and has lived most of his life in the west. Lahiri too has
lived her life in the U.S. with brief visits back to India. “She knows
how to weave plot and character with great subtlety; she has a way of
understanding the psychological agony that people suffer in certain
social conditions. She is a remarkable observer of human interaction
and of how relationships are made, and she has a very finely tuned
sense of place in her work. This is why she’s a great writer, not
because her parents happen to be Indian.”
Yes, we Indians do tend to claim anyone who has even an ounce of Indian
blood as ‘Indian’ and revel in their success, no matter where they
live! While Indians and Indian-Americans are quite thrilled with
Lahiri’s meteoric rise, what is remarkable is her crossover appeal,
with translations into 30 languages. Perhaps what connects readers most
to her is that, in spite of her talent and luck, she is, in many ways,
just like them.
She has had early rejections, she has struggled with name, identity,
duty and self, family ups and downs and her place in the world. She has
been a daughter, a wife, a mother — and the emotions and discoveries of
those realities have seeped into her work. She can articulate those
gains, losses and longings better than any of us and we are grateful to
her for that, for she is a diarist of our lives.
“This is a novel as affecting in its Chekhovian exploration of fathers
and sons, parents and children as it is resonant in its exploration of
what is acquired and lost by immigrants and their children in pursuit
of the American dream,” wrote The New York Times about The Namesake.
Lahiri would be the first to question her title as an ‘Indian’ writer.
She has always eschewed labels, of ‘Indian’, ‘Asian’, ‘Multicultural’ —
and prefers the stark, simple title of ‘writer’.
Deepika Bahri, Associate Professor of English at Emory University in
Atlanta, says, “I would say it’s important to locate Lahiri where she
is, which is within an Indian-American context. There are continuities
in the two categories and we have to honour them, but it wouldn’t be
fair either to Lahiri or to Indian writers to conflate the two
categories. Indian writers in India would resent that because they
should command their own space and, for her, it just wouldn’t be
adequate to describe the canvas that she is encompassing.”
Indeed, Lahiri’s canvas has very specific cultural details of the lives
of Bengali-American immigrants and it is these details that add
humanity and make the story come alive even for people who are not part
of that world, says Sunita Mukhi, Professor in the Department of Asian
and Asian American Studies at Stony Brook University in New York.
“These stories can be shared by many others who have a sense of
displacement but who find a comfort and home in all these specific
details of family life, food and fragrances.”
Mukhi has used Lahiri’s books in her class “Desi in the Diaspora”,
where — although 60 per cent of her students are Indian — the rest are
Latino, Blacks, Bangladeshi and other minorities. She found that all of
them seem to relate to Lahiri’s work, especially to The Namesake: “They
identify with her. She is articulating a lot of their anxieties and
their despair of being of desi descent and living in America. Many who
read the same book and are not necessarily Bengali, can begin to
understand the culture of displacement too.”
Yet, her continuous pursuit of these themes has its detractors too. One
reader tweeted: “Tired of her one-track immigration angst. She has been
writing about not belonging for 15 years now! Getting old now!”
Bahri says: “I find that objectionable. Would you lay that charge on
Jane Austen? There are thousands of stories to be told about these
lives. She shows how dynamic and internally diverse culture can be
without succumbing to this great seduction of tradition or the romance
of Indian values, while still showing how it might matter.”
What Bahri does have a critique about is the fact that Lahiri is a
little disingenuous when she says she’s not accepted as a true
American, given her extraordinary success in the marketplace and her
great appeal in the American literary world where she operates very
much within an American tradition of writing.
With the advent of Lahiri’s new novel The Lowland there seems to be
fresh debate on her writing style as well as whether she is a better
writer of short stories than of the novel. Randy Boyagoda wrote in The
Financial Times, “Booker or not, The Lowland is awash with Lahirical
excess.” Porochista Khakpour in the Los Angeles Times writes about her
“passionless restraint”: “In Lahiri’s fiction even when there is some
blood on some hands, it’s like watercolour blood, non-threatening and
even comely. Sometimes that is magical and other times it feels
dishonest.”
Bhabha makes an insightful point about Lahiri and Rushdie: “It is the
strength of these writers that having some kind of Indian cultural
background largely through their families has opened them up to really
appreciating the complexities on a world scale. Whatever it is that’s
passed down to them through their families with an Indian aspect has
made them voracious for experience on a global scale.”
Indeed, Lahiri actually lives what she writes about — and that perhaps
is the secret of her appeal to readers everywhere: she has a hunger for
embracing the world and new experiences.
As she told Salon magazine recently: “To a certain degree, all four
books are visiting and revisiting a certain migration pattern, in terms
of what the characters are doing. That is something I’m less interested
in continuing to explore right now. I feel — I want to look elsewhere,
and look at things differently.”
Forsaking her parochial Brooklyn neighbourhood, much like her parents
leaving Kolkata, she now lives in Rome with her husband Alberto
Vourvoulias-Bush, a senior editor at Time magazine. Far away from
everything familiar, she is starting to write in Italian and exposing
her two American-born children Noor and Octavio to a life of
dislocation — and discovery.
So is she the next big ‘Indian’ writer after Rushdie? Maybe not. But
she’s certainly a writer, who like Rushdie, attempts to swallow the
universe whole and claim a global citizenship.
Lavina Melwani is a New York-based journalist who writes for several international publications and blogs at www.lassiwithlavina.com. Twitter @lassiwithlavina. Google+ the author.

No comments:
Post a Comment