English 101 \"This Blessed House\" by Jhumpa Lahiri PDF

Preview

Summary

Evaluation of "This Blessed House" Jhumpa Lahiri...

Description

Janny Yan Dan Hurley October 31 2017 English 101

Through a Lover’s Eye Depending on who’s reading this, relationships are complicated, which would be the understatement of the year. Societies strive off of compatible couples. If everyone hates each other, people would never get anything done. The short story "This Blessed House," by Jhumpa Lahiri, follows a newly wedded couple’s struggles of being functional with each other in day to day life. The struggles between the two might include the differences of past culture, background, and personalities. In the short story, Lahiri uses a selective third person view on the main character Sanjeev, expressing a stronger sense of connection with the theme and readers; thus, advancing the theme of how compromise can keep a relationship striving. How can one understand a situation from only one perspective? It's not as impossible as one would think; it is quite plausible. In pieces of literature, authors tend to be selective about the point of view they use. Omniscient selective is just as popular of a choice as first-person narration because they both can achieve the effect of drawing the readers further into the story. Whenever a point of view is selective towards one character it creates a stronger bond between that character and the readers. The readers are able to explore with the characters’ figurative mind. With Sanjeev as the narrator, the readers are able to understand why he thinks the things he does about Twinkle. While he is analyzing his own relationship, we are also able to decipher how real the love is between the two. Sanjeev thought back to when he wasn’t married and was only dating Twinkle. Sanjeev told her that he loved her because she asked him if she did. At the time he gave an answer that would satisfy her, but she never told him that

she loved him back. Going over the situation again, he started to think otherwise: “Though she did not say it herself, he assumed then that she loved him too, but now he was no longer sure” (Lahiri 996). As Sanjeev questions Twinkle’s love the readers can see that Sanjeev still remembers that moment from the beginning, which means upon knowing, he still married her. Allowing himself to continue loving her shows that he compromised the thought that their love may not be pure. Compromise also occurs at smaller scales in the short story. Whenever Twinkle found Christian artifacts around the house Sanjeev would feel almost threatened by them. The readers know that he is clearly threatened by these figures because he tells Twinkle to throw them away. However, since this relationship is based on compromise, Sanjeev allows Twinkle to display the pieces on the mantle. The readers would not have known that Sanjeev was threatened by these pieces if the narrative wasn’t selective on him. When Twinkle found the Virgin Mary, initially Sanjeev wanted to remove it from the yard. At the end, they kept the statue because Twinkle cried over the statue, which Sanjeev had never encountered: “He had never seen her cry before, had never seen such sadness in her eyes” (Lahiri 967). Having no choice, Sanjeev compromises again, not wanting to upset Twinkle. Since the readers can’t see the situation from Twinkle’s side the readers don’t know how her attachment is like towards the Christian figures. The readers do however see that Sanjeev doesn’t want anything to do with the figures, in fear of being judged by acquaintances. When Sanjeev tells Twinkle to get rid of certain figures, he practically begs her to do so. He states clearly, “‘Twinkle, I can’t have the people I work with see this statue on my lawn’” (Lahiri 966). Twinkle, on the other hand, who does not take in the account of his distress, responds, “‘They can’t fire you for being a believer. It would be discrimination’... ‘Why does it matter to you so much what other people think?’” (Lahiri 966). Not having the omniscient selective towards Twinkle, the readers don’t know if she simply dismissed his plea or if she is clueless of her husband's self-consciousness. Therefore, the point of view is essential to the story. If the point

of view wasn’t mainly on Sanjeev, the readers wouldn’t understand how he is compromising to keep his relationship together. Twinkle compared to her husband is less significant because she does as she pleases. When the selective omniscient comes into play, it displays Sanjeev’s great lengths to fit in also. He tries to fit into the “American dream” while Twinkle, born in California, was already living the “American dream” this in some way is considered a compromise. Sanjeev tries to fit into his new lifestyle to match the one his wife has had since she was born. However, he must learn from his wife that trying to fit in and monitoring his appearance for others is not part of that dream. When Sanjeev attempted to please others by listening to music such as “the Fifth Symphony,” (Lahiri 962) Twinkle told him that his taste in music was boring. While learning how to live a life without worrying so much about how others think about him, he has to compromise with his wife’s so-called “shenanigans.” Even though he believes that displaying the figures opposing his own religion could harm his image, he compromises for his wife, while learning not to care for others’ judgment at the same time. Characters in most stories are forever changing. Sanjeev in the Lahiri work is clearly seen as a dynamic character. Over the course of the story, Sanjeev grows into a different version of himself than from the beginning. This growth comes from all the compromises and new understandings he has had with his wife. Twinkle in the story is depicted as a static unchanging character. Maybe Twinkle did change over the course of the story, but from the point of view that is selectively towards Sanjeev, the readers may never know. If the point of view was on Twinkle, the readers could also see the change and compromise she had to undergo. However, from what the readers could gather, Twinkle did not compromise to great extents for the relationship, meaning her point of view would have been insignificant towards the theme. Near the end of the story, the change in the Sanjeev character is about his love towards Twinkle. He thinks to himself, “Unlike the other things they’d found, this contained dignity, solemnity, beauty he hated it because he knew that Twinkle loved it” (Lahiri 971). It is not very

clear if Sanjeev still loves his wife, but it clearly shows that Sanjeev dislikes the holy figure because Twinkle liked them, not because he worries about what others think of him. Later, he complies and helps display more Holy figures, because he is compromising despite his new revelation on why he disliked them in the first place. Some would believe that Twinkle’s character was also compromising in the relationship and that the point of view had no significance towards the theme because both characters supported it equally. If both characters supported it equally then the omniscient view would not have been selective. The compromises Twinkle makes are inconsequential when differentiated with Sanjeev’s compromises. All Twinkle compromised was listening to Sanjeev’s single request out of many. The request she gave into was to displaying a Christian poster elsewhere: “‘I’ll put it behind the door,’ she offered. ‘That way, when they peek in, they won’t see. Happy?’” In no other part of the story have signals of Twinkle’s compromises or distress came up (Lahiri 962). This minor act of compromise further concludes that Lahiri’s stylistic point of view is essential to developing the theme. Things may go south within a relationship when communication goes awry. Compromise is a halfway point or a “halfway happy place” that can contain certain problems. This “halfway happy place” Is met throughout the short story when Sanjeev compromises for his wife, Twinkle. The omniscient selective point of view on Sanjeev and all the compromises being made in “This Blessed House” reveals that despite certain differences relationships are still able to thrive.

Works Cited Lahiri, Jhumpa. “This Blessed House.” Literature for Composition, edited by Sylvan Barnet et al., Longman, 2017, pp. 960-971....