2) Compose a "fat paragraph" blog response comparing and contrasting the use of plot development in a"Only Goodness." Use direct evidence whenever possible. Please use a personalized writing voice. Do not make yourself and sound like a robot. Also...NO SPARKNOTES!!!! I CONSIDER IT CHEATING! If I catch you, you will receive no credit for the assignment.
This is your opportunity to engage with the text. This is a skills based course. This is your chance to build-up those skills without risk. Read the stories. Give your personal opinion. Be thoughtful. Be authentic. Be brilliant.
I look forward to your responses,
Mr. P.
Blog Criteria &
Rubric
Overview: This
is your space to read and discuss ideas about the material we read in
class. You will notice that these blog
responses are intensive, but it will allow you to speak your mind and obtain
immediate feedback. These homework
assignments will count substantially, and the rubric below will help guide
you. I will show some examples in class,
and you are always free to discuss your work with me in class or after
school.
A range has
the following qualities:
Ø Well written
Ø Personal voice is present
Ø Thoughtful, meaningful, and there is always evidence
that the student read the text closely
Ø Responses do not merely agree but challenge fellow
students to think critically
Ø Well-chosen direct evidence from a text
Ø Responds to fellow classmates so that a dialogue is going
on
Ø Takes risks
Ø Returns to add comments to have a conversation
B range may
exhibit some of the above qualities, BUT:
Ø Too formal, little personal engagement
Ø Direct evidence from text; however, it may not be
well chosen or framed
Ø A thinner response than the A range
Ø A super long technical response that could be more
concise
C range may
exhibit some of the above qualities, BUT:
Ø Responds to the prompt in a general manner
Ø Repeats what someone else wrote, as the student
obviously did not read through the other responses
Ø There is a voice, but little evidence that the
student read closely
Ø There are no direct evidence, but there are some
general examples
D and F range
may exhibit some of the above qualities, BUT:
Ø Late responses that could be high quality but only
completed to avoid a zero
Ø A few sentences and comments, but little to no
analysis
Ø Little engagement
Ø Is openly cruel to a classmate
Ø Knowingly inappropriate
Hello.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAlthough a tactic not commonly used in short stories, Lahiri chooses to introduce the “gun” of her story in the very first sentence: “It was Sudha who introduced Rahul to alcohol…” (128) Almost immediately, readers can predict the storyline of Only Goodness will be centered around Rahul’s struggle with alcohol addiction, a prediction that holds true throughout. In contrast with novels such as The Great Gatsby, where Gatsby is seemingly set up for a fortunate ending right up until his assassination, such transparency marks a dramatic shift that can almost leave a reader stunned at how much information is being given beforehand. To compensate, Lahiri extends her rising action by giving new characters unusually vivid descriptions- “He was older than she expected, closer to forty judging from the eyes, clear blue eyes that settled calmly upon different points of her face. His expression was serious, placid cast… His name was Roger Featherstone”- making the reader want to read on to find out how that character specific will contribute to the plot. This technique is also used in The Great Gatsby when Nick is introduced to a whole new cast of new characters, including Tom’s lover, during his weekend getaway to the inner-city. Its practice gives the author a safety blanket to hold his readers’ interest in the event that they have already figured out the general plotline of hit novel. Additionally, the elongation of the more intense rising action also means a shorter falling action, making the novel feel more suspenseful and interesting for a longer period.
ReplyDeleteThe way the story opens causes the reader to guess what the conflict will involve. The first couple of sentences describe Sudha introducing her brother to alcohol, and him not liking it, however, later in the same paragraph he asks her to “buy him some six-packs”. This immediately alerted me to the idea that Rahul and alcohol would be instrumental to the plot of the story. Furthermore, because they were hiding the cans “so that their parents wouldn’t see them” I thought that it could also be related to the conflict in the story. The plot does not continue linearly, instead includes a flashback to when Sudha and Rahul were younger. By including this flashback, I could see how Sudha was always his caretaker and wanted what was best for him, even if it caused her envy. I thought that this correlated to when the story is in present day, because she was just as devoted to him despite the fact that he caused the family pain. Seeing Rahul’s perfect childhood also provides a contrast for his decline when he is older. The reader sees him with every opportunity and his sister’s doting love, but this is contrasted with him as a young adult who has dropped out of college and is living at home, drinking all day. The flashback sparked curiosity as to why Rahul and Sudha ended up so differently. I thought that the conclusion of this flashback, that Rahul was “always aware of the family’s weaknesses” and “never [spared] Sudha from the things she least wanted to do” foreshadowed that he would continue this trend, and which came to fruition at the end; Rahul was aware of his own weakness with alcohol, but would not shut himself out of Sudha’s life, so instead, he left her to shut him out of hers. The final few pages of the story are where the climax takes place, and it is full of suspense; when Roger and Sudha return home from their date night to a messy kitchen, the anxiety felt by the characters and the readers heightens, until Sudha finds Neel alone in the bath and Rahul passed out. After this, the falling action of Roger and Sudha fighting, and Roger distrusting Sudha leads to the conclusion of Sudha shutting her brother out of her life forever. There was a lot of build-up and backstory before the climax, and it was resolved relatively quickly compared to the rest of the plot. This was done because otherwise the reader would not have cared enough about Sudha, and would not have had enough hope that Rahul had changed.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe plot of “Only Goodness” is intricate because of the arrangement of events and the discriminated occasion of Rahul becoming an alcoholic. When the exposition in the story begins with the line: “It was Sudha who’d introduced Rahul to alcohol,” you immediately infer that Rahul will be part of the conflict that takes place later. Lahiri begins the story in a very specific way that caused me to instantly question what would happen next. This was especially the case when she provided a flashback of Sudha’s first memories of Rahul and how “There was not the same documentation of Sudha’s infancy” which suggests that there is some envy Sudha expresses towards her brother from the start. Throughout the story, the plot stays engaging and is full of clues that led me to different anticipations about Rahul’s alcoholism and how it would affect Sudha’s life. During the rising action, as Rahul and Sudha enter college, and you eventually learn about how Rahul’s problems have worsened. Then Sudha gets married, and the rest of the story moves quicker than in the beginning because I think based on the way the characters were introduced, it makes sense that there would be a climatic consequence in which a shorter falling action and conclusion would follow. When Sudha writes to Rahul telling him to visit her and her child, I interpreted this detail as a sign that foreshadowed the moment Rahul leaves her child alone in the bathtub and from there the story began the falling action. I found that this story’s plot allowed me to completely understand the situation because of the amount of detail and clues Lahiri provided throughout about Rahul and Sudha’s relationship.
ReplyDeleteJhumpa Lahiri’s Only Goodness subverts reader expectations by twisting common plot development tropes by employing two climaxes, a fake one which sets up reader expectations, and a real one which shatters those expectations. The fake, semi-climax, occurs in the middle of the short story, when Rahul makes a drunken toast at his sister’s wedding and shortly thereafter abandons the family for around a year. Up until this point, the plot of the story has charted a predictable course through the lives of Rahul and his family. We have witnessed his alcoholism drag him down from the golden child of the family, to a irresponsible, angry, lay about with no prospects, his relationship with the rest of his family disintegrating as he grows ever more hateful of continual control and judgement his parents seem to have over his life. These tensions are finally release in the fake climax when he runs away after stealing family heirlooms to pay for his trip, a selfish and spiteful act. For a standard tale of a fall from grace, this would seem like the climax. The reader expects Rahul to make this last awful decision and for the rest of the story to be devoted to his redemption, him making amends with those he hurt, affirming a message of familial love and forgiveness. The plot continues like this was the case, with Rahul showing up at Sudha’s home, expressing regret and showing that he has pulled his life together, and spending a blissful week with Sudhe and her family. However, a few pages before the end of the story, the actual climax rears its head. After entrusting baby Neel into Rahul’s care, Sudha and Roger come home to find that Rahul had lapsed back into alcoholism and endangered Neel in the process. Seeing this, Sudha finally decides to cut Rahul out of her life, banishing him from their home forever, watching him leave as the story ends. This final confrontation shatters all the expectations of love and family values set up by the conventional redemption plot, revealing the crushing fragility of familial love and the necessity to remove toxic people from your life. In addition, this climax adopts an entirely new meaning when compared to the first climax. When deciding to cut Rahul out of her life, Sudha realizes that “after everything Rahul had put [their parents] through they never renounced him, never abandoned him. They were incapable of shutting him out… Sudha realized as the wakeful night passed, that she was capable…”(171). Rahul alcoholism has emotionally tormented Sudha’s family for so many years, and this last mistake is a sobering reminder of that. Even though he is repentant, all of Rahul’s unwitting abuses over the years have made it so that Sudha must remove him from the picture in order to preserve herself and her family. This action and the motives behind it become even more meaningful when you realize Rahul did the exact same thing in the first climax. Rahul angrily cut himself away from his family and while his choice is portrayed as childish and irresponsible, ‘competent’ Sudha’s same choice is deemed necessary and are what resolve the story. Comparing the two decisions you see that they are motivated by the same emotions. Just as Rahul’s accumulated alcoholic tendencies and mannerisms are what cause Sudha to abandon him, the overbearing control and perceived judgement of their parents is what convinced Rahul to abandon the family. Nobody meant to hurt anyone: Rahul never meant to emotionally torment his family over the years, he never meant to endanger baby Neel, their parents never meant to drive Rahul away with their expectations and control, and Sudha never meant to ruin Rahul’s life when she introduced him to alcohol at a young age. But the outcome of all these unwitting abuses is the same, a break in the family. By employing two climaxes, Lahiri not only subverts reader expectations, but also compares the two climaxes reveal the fragility of family relationships, how people can drive each other apart over the years without even realizing it.
ReplyDeleteAlso sorry is this is too long or is dumb
ReplyDeleteNo I think it's really good actually and I liked how you went through a bunch of the plot structure points
DeleteI agree with Maddy! I think your response is very interesting and insightful
DeleteIt was easy to see that from the first sentence of the story “Only Goodness”, “It was Sudha who introduces Rahul to alcohol,” that alcoholism would be a very prevalent part of the story. It was also easy to see the History of the story, with the flashbacks to Sudha and Rahuls childhood, and the rising action and climax happened at a good pace, not too rushed but overly drawn out. However, I was surprised at how quickly the falling action took place. Since the rising action was a little more slow, I expected the falling action to follow the same pattern. But I can see why Lahiri chose to use Neel in the bathtub as the climax/falling action. Because Rahul was passed out and Neel was left unattended, Sudha’s decision to end all communications with her brother was a very quick decision. Her child, who she loves and cares for, was placed in the care of her brother, who throughout the course of his college years was also looked after by Sudha. While reading this part of the story I thought that Rahul would pull through and prove himself in this moment and show a promising side after showing poor responsibility after so many years, but he instead did as he always does and let people down. I liked that Lahiri ended the story as quickly as Sudha ended her relationship with her brother. It was a little unorthodox but I thought it made sense after reading “Happy Endings” When I was reading “Happy Endings”, I could easily see and follow the plot of each story. The most surprising thing to me was that in story C. when John kills not only himself, but also Mary and James. Those stories were simple and straightforward with very distinct plot structures, so when I went back to review “Only Goodness” the path through its plot line jumped out at me more.
ReplyDeleteIn only goodness the story begins in the past with an anecdote of the time Sudha introduces Rahul to alcohol. This seemingly innocent and somewhat bonding act between Sudha and Rahul are what create a web of possible paths that the story could go down allowing the reader to build suspense themselves as the cause of the conflict is presented very clearly. The tone is nostalgic and somewhat daunting, set up in a way that you have a strong feeling something will go wrong. As Jhumpa Lahiri works through the exposition they slowly unravel the brother in a way that you see his drinking spiralling out of control as Sudha does, leaving a part of his history and life a complete mystery. The time in between these visits home when Sudha sees Rahul allows for tension to build in their relationship as well as in the household with the parents. There are, in a way, two separate climactic moments in Only Goodness; after Rahul leaves home and when Sudha and her husband come home to find Rahul passed out drunk on the day bed. During both these moments you feel nothing but disdain towards Rahul because every action he has made throughout the entire plot line haes been detrimental to your opinion of his overall character.
ReplyDeleteI really liked the phrase you used "web of possible paths". It really captured my attention as a reader and perfectly described the way Lahiri formed the plot of the story!
DeleteOne tactic that the author Jhumpa Lahiri uses in the short story “Only Goodness” is guilt. With the story opening to: “It was Sudha who’d introduced Rahul to alcohol,” the reader immediately gets pulled into the story and implores to know more. Lahari creates a sense of curiosity between the reader and immediately spawns the idea that Rahul and his problems with alcohol will be the core concept within the story. The idea that his sister introduced alcohol to Rahul creates the plot of the story and it thickens when Rahul writes to his sister about wanting to visit her and her son in London. Sudha who feels guilty about her brother's alcoholism invites him to her home to meet her son Neel. However, alcohol comes in the way again and endangers her family when Rahul leaves her son unattended when babysitting. As an indian living in the United States I actually enjoyed the story because it was something I could relate to. Rahul and his sister are example of what happens when two opposite cultures clash. Coming from indian origin drinking is seen as a taboo and is only something that older adults do. So when Rahul dropped out of school due to drinking I can see that he fell victim to pressure of fitting in and trying to belong. The plot of the story is something I personally can relate to because it's hard being an American and an Indian because how opposing the cultures are and Rahul and Sudha are a perfect examples of what can happen when you lose who you are.
ReplyDeleteAs Michael and Skylar said, the author chooses to introduce the conflict in the first sentence of the story. Readers can predict from the beginning that Rahul will be involved in some incident with alcohol and there will be some sort of destruction from it. It is interesting to compare the two siblings in the story, Rahul and Sudha, because of the very different paths they take after starting from the same place. Referring to Happy Endings, Sudha’s life fits almost perfectly into scenario A. She goes to college, does very well, doesn’t get in much trouble, gets married and has a child. By most standards, she is fulfilled and happy. However, her story isn’t very interesting with no conflict. Rahul, on the other hand, represents the many other scenarios. He does not live up to the expectations of his family, but eventually he seems to pull it together ( until the very end). For me, the turning point that officially confirmed the reader’s suspicions was when Rahul asked Sudha to take him to the liquor store when he was in college- this was the rising action. An effective tool that Lahiri used to show the history between these siblings was the retelling of Sudha’s childhood experiences; “ Sudha had slipped through the cracks, but she was determined that her little brother would make his mark on America” (136). It’s clear that Rahul had always been adored by his family and envied by his sister. By structuring the story so that the reader learns about Sudha and Rahul’s childhood after they are introduced to Rahul’s drinking problem, Lahiri makes sure that the readers form an emotional bond to the characters, making the story more powerful. Knowing what Rahul becomes makes it difficult for the reader to hear about how much his family anticipated his bright future. In this story, the climax is at the end of the story, with Rahul putting Sudha’s child in danger as a result of his drinking problem. Up until that point, the story is told in an almost calm manner. Rahul’s decline into alcoholism and disconnection with his family is a predictable process, with Sudha as the only person seeing the path he is headed down for what it truly is. Sudha’s hopefulness is similar to a reader who always assumes there will be some sort of “happy ending”. While her brother made plenty of mistakes, he gained her trust back quickly. Sudha’s assumption that he could change his ways contrasts with her earlier self, who saw the worst parts of Rahul before her parents did. In the context of Happy Endings scenario A, both Sudha and Rahul achieved a happy ending. However, neither one of them feels happy and complete.
ReplyDeleteLahiri's writing skills are evident right from the start of the short story "Only Goodness." As everyone else mentioned, her opening line was not only a powerful sentence, but also one that makes more and more sense as the short story gradually unfolds. The reader is presented with this somewhat aggressive, in-your-face opening, which hooks the reader and pulls him or her into the story. It's also an emotionally heavy sentence, as something as drastic as alcoholism being instigated by one's own sister is a difficult thought to digest. With every page turn, the reader is able to discern the facets that make up Lahiri's initial sentence, such as Rahul's leaving Neel alone while he was passed out from intoxication. However, perhaps most interesting is the relationship between Rahul and Sudha. Although Sudha feels undeniably guilty for having introduced Rahul to alcohol during his youth, she neither sympathizes with his woes nor helps him rehabilitate. Instead, the end of the short story sees Sudha abruptly deciding to cut off ties with Rahul. This particular point in the story was well-written, in my opinion. As an Indian-American citizen, I felt the manner in which situations like these are dealt with seemed very actual. Also, although I haven't been through college myself, I'm sure that Lahiri's descriptions of peer pressure in college, which amplified Rahul's drinking, is accurate as well. Also, it's worth mentioning that the way in which Lahiri unraveled her story significantly helped increase the potency of her message. Instead of just chronicling events as they happened, Lahiri takes the time to bounce back between settings and develop her characters thoroughly, which allows the reader to make connections as the story progresses. The ending of the story also had me wondering why exactly Lahiri titled the story what it is. For such a bittersweet ending, I wonder what the title "Only Goodness" symbolizes.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteFrom my understanding, I feel like the title refers to what Sudha represents to Rahul. She is the one who let him taste the pleasures of drinking in the first place, and also the one who invites him in later on. Though they cut ties eventually. She will always be his family no matter what, but in a different sense. They won't be close ever again, but she is still somewhere in his heart. Sudha symbolizes the goodness that Rahul has had, negatively and positively.
DeleteMost authors telling a story have a happy ending where the good guy triumphs over the bad guy. James Bond always ends up killing the bad guy. Indiana Jones always makes a miraculous escape. Rocky overcomes every obstacle and manages to defeat the seemingly unbeatable Ivan Drago. These, and many more stories have a predictable ending and frankly, it can get repetitive and boring. As Margaret Atwood said in her short story Happy Endings “You’ll have to face it, the endings are all the same no matter how you slice it. Don’t be deluded by any other endings, they’re all fake, either deliberately fake, with malicious intent to deceive, or just motivated by excessive optimism if not downright sentimentality.” Realizing this popular cliche of story writing, Lahiri decides to take Atwood’s advice and show that it is sometimes inevitable that a story will not always have a happy ending. Although the reader may be tricked into thinking Rahul has changed his ways, he ends up going back to the bottle because he simply can't handle life as it is. The reader can only assume that Rahul would continue drinking after the story ended and die as an alcoholic. After all, he managed to get himself completely wasted after drinking the “tiniest bit” (173) of alcohol. Lahiri touches on the sad fact of life that more times than not, our problems end tragically rather than happily. In the end, evil, in this case booze, triumphs. The sorrowful conclusion in Only Goodness is also present in George Orwell’s 1984. Winston, the protagonist, tries his best to overthrow the oppressive government but eventually ends up in prison, completely stripped of his identity. 1984, like Only Goodness shows that en though we would like to think that good always wins, sometimes evil thrives.
ReplyDelete-Steven Parrill
DeleteFor me the interesting part in the plot of “Only Goodness” is the seeming lack of suspense. We know from the start that this story is about alcohol, we know that this is going to be a story about the dynamics between a brother and a sister, we know based off of Lahiri’s other works that there will most likely not be a happy ending tied in a bow. Yet Lahiri still manages to make the story intriguing. Personally I began to feel that the story was going down a different path when Rahul writes to Sudha saying that he was sober and that he “things are better now.” (161). This I believe is the true climax. As Sam said, the story had been set up so that the scene at the wedding feels like a climax, a crazy situation that escalates out of control and ends with Rahul leaving. This is a much quieter climax, a letter that begs for forgiveness and ultimately sets up the true downfall of Rahul and Sudha’s relationship. If we consider this to be the turning point of the story the trope of the alcoholic family member is not completely turned on it’s head but it becomes much more personal and realistic. Sudha wants to forgive her brother, she wants to see his progress and trust him again. After she replies to his letter and he arrives in London the falling action starts and the ultimate climax where Rahul fails once again after letting down Sudha and his family countless times before this. I do not have experience with alcoholism or addiction but to me this felt very real, the repeated pattern of falling down, making amends, then falling down once again. Suspense was not needed in this story, because knowing what was going to happen made it all the more heartbreaking.
ReplyDeleteAs many have said, Lahiri uses the beginning of her story to cultivate the events that will later happen. I personally like how she uses the format of the beginning serving as the structuring for the rest of the story because I think it draws in the reader. For me, when I first read about Sudha introducing Rahul to alcohol right off the bat, it drew me in because I could infer that the story would involve situations and problems because of the alcohol. I think the detailed representation of Sudha’s struggle of making Rahul’s life as great as she could, “at times she engaged more in Rahul’s upbringing than they did” (136), yet him not creating a prosperous life for himself, is much like the many outcomes in “Happy Endings”. Each situation for Rahul, such as him going off to college, coming home for vacations and his plans after quitting college, caused Sudha to hope for a great outcome eventhough each time he fell short of what Sudha had expected. Each time Sudha and Rahul would come back to Wayland from their separate lives, Rahul would be at a new and unexpected place in his life. When he first came home from Cornell his grades were bad, then the next vacations they would be worse and worse until he dropped out. This reminds me of the different story endings in “Happy Endings” because each one seemed to get progressively worse or different than the original. The first sentence of ending A reads, “John and Mary fall in love and get married”, and then the next one reads, “Mary falls in love with John but John doesn’t fall in love with Mary” (21). This is not as happy as the first ending and its showing a negative progression and things not turning out as anticipated. Eventually the passages start to involve completely different people, much like how Rahul is becoming almost like a completely different person than he was in the beginning of the story. The structuring of negative progression of events was important to the plot because it can traced back to the very first sentences, allowing the story to come full circle.
ReplyDeleteI guessed that Only Goodness will be about Rahul addiction to drinking because of the very first line like everyone else said, which is the conflict. As series of events develop slowly, Rahul’s conditions get worse and Sudha’s trust towards him increases. I feel like the turning point is when Rahul send Sudha a letter apologizing, “I want to say that I’m sorry. For everything. I know I screwed up, but things are better now” (160). Like Sudha, I also believed that he will change for real this time. He is her little brother after all. From every book I’ve read so far, I was only exposed to Happy Endings, where main characters either live happily ever after or get whatever they want. Like a complicated version of Happy Ending A. But Lahiri ends this story with only a few pages. I had to pause a little while reading because the scenes were playing in my head and I was thinking, “Please no.” It broke my heart knowing that Sudha has cut Rahul completely from her life. The way Lahiri threads together series of events really draws me in. They are not exaggerated (maybe a little), but they are realistic. Especially when she puts in a flashback to demonstrate the bond between the siblings, that intensifies my curiosity of wanting to know what will happen next, and also making me putting myself in Sudha’s shoes. That's what I like about Lahiri's writings.
ReplyDeleteAlright,Blogspot, let's get personal. "Only Goodness" hit really close to home for me because I have a family member who is an alcoholic. It gave me a certain perspective as I read the story because Jhumpa did a great job of drawing me in and creating an attachment between the reader and the characters but at the same time I subconsciously stayed distant because I had a good idea of how the story would go. Starting off with his first experience drinking was expected because whenever there's an addiction, authors give you the story that preceded it. Following Rahul through his ups and downs of failing school, relying on his family to help him stay afloat, finding something good (Elena), losing himself at the wedding, going off in search of peace, reporting that he has improved and asking for forgiveness, and then ruining things again was unfortunately easy for me to do because although I wasn't able to predict the way things happened, I could count on the pattern of bad, good, bad again. What was odd, though I should've been aware of this, was that I thought he'd stay okay after the way he acted while visiting Sudha. I've forgiven and believed that 'this was the last time' all my life and been disappointed repeatedly but I still managed to convince myself that Rahul had been rehabilitated and things would end well so when Sudha and Roger find Neel in the tub and Rahul passed out drunk, I was taken by surprise. I should've known that something bad would happen, I wondered if Rahul might go out drinking and come home a mess but I didn't expect him to be so irresponsible after all the love he showed Neel. I didn't expect him to ruin his relationship with Sudha. Like Sonnet said, we knew that no story of Jhumpa's in Unaccustomed Earth would have a happy ending but because of my lens, I had faith in Rahul. (Also, awkward thing, my alcoholic family member's name is Raul and is pronounced the same way so #doubletrigger.)
ReplyDeleteIn terms of the Plot intro, "Only Goodness" followed almost everything except for suspense and a clear climax (because, like Sonnet pointed out, you can argue over where the climax actually was). I enjoyed the fact that Jhumpa began with the backstory of Sudha and Rahul drinking together because it was something that continued throughout the story with Sudha placing the blame entirely on herself. And I liked that it ended with a resolution of sorts to that original story. She believed she's the reason this addiction began and when the time came for that last straw that addiction broke their relationship. It didn't return to the opening story in a literal way but the story finally got its drawn-out ending.
Yes this is what I think is so interesting about this story, it really plays with the readers expectation of what will happen at the end. We are given enough background to understand that there won't be a happy ending but you can't help but hope that Rahul turns it all around and doesn't disappoint Sudha (and you the reader) yet again. So I don't think its odd that you thought he stay on the wagon when visiting Sudha, its what makes the story's plot unique. Also after reading about your personal experience with alcoholism this story is probably understood differently from your eyes than somebody like me who has no connection with addiction.
DeleteI totally agree with what you said: I really wanted to believe that Rahul had changed when he visited Sudha again. Even though, at second thought, Lahiri dropped some pretty heavy hints that something would go wrong, I didn't want to believe it and still was disapointed by Rahul and his actions.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the description of the use of plot in the Norton's Introduction to Literature, I realized that the story Only Goodness would be nothing but facts without a plot. Lahiri uses many elements of plot to maximize the effect of her message. Early in the story, Lahiri creates an exposition by not only introducing the characters, but also the cultural background and parental expectations. After providing the reader with background information, the author starts to depict the rising action. One of the most significant components of the rising action is Sudha introducing Rahul to alcohol. It started when they were drinking beer, “they shared one cupful, then another, listening to the Stones and the Doors on Rahul’s record player, smoking cigarettes next to the open window and exhaling through the screen (128)”. She creates a very effective series of events that make up the rising action which complicates the story, intensifies, and adds conflict. The action continues to rise as Sudha and Rahul move on in their lives, both in very different directions. The story reaches a turning point when Suhda receives a letter from Rahul many years later saying that “I know I screwed up, but things are better now” (160). Just as it appears that Rahul has finally changed his ways, Lahiri shocks the reader with the climax of the story. I was shocked to find out that Rahul “passed out and left the baby alone in the tub (172). After the climax, Lahiri does utilize falling action, but sparingly so you can determine the ending. Lahiri brings the story Only Goodness to an increasingly high level with each element of the plot.
ReplyDeleteUnlike most authors, Jhumpa Lahiri introduces the conflict in the opening sentence of her story allowing for readers to predict right away what the story will be focusing on (in this case the bond between sibling and how alcoholism affects said bond) as well as possible conclusions. This is unusual as it strays from the plot layout we have all learned, imbedded into our brains since elementary (intro, rising action, climax, falling action, etc) Personally as someone who rarely enjoys surprises, but loves detective work I enjoyed this layout of the story. It allowed me to make inferences about what was to come and pushed me to read more to find out if my predictions were right. For me and for most people there is nothing better than being right! I believe that Lahiri picked up on the enjoyment readers find when they are able to guess and check and used it to her advantage to keep her audience interested and create an intriguing piece of work. Margaret Atwood stated in Happy Endings that “the ending’s are the same however you slice it.” I disagree with this statement. I think that there can be all different kinds of endings, from happy to sad to unexpected. As a reader, it is fun to weigh all possible options for an ending. While reading Only Goodness, I came up with an ending that fit both the sad, happy, and unexpected category, unfortunately, it was the sad ending that proved true. It is true that parts of endings can be predictable, in a way staying true to Atwood's statement that they are all the same. However their aspects to every ending that people could not have guessed and their are numerous ways an author can choose to end their book. In Only Goodness, it was predictable that Rahul would return to his alcoholic tendencies but their was no guessing that Sudha’s child would have been involved, or that Sudha even would have a child at all. Also if Jhumpa Lahiri had wanted she could have completely changed the ending. Maybe Rahul didn’t give in to his alcoholism or he pushed Sudha to drink with him, turning her into an alcoholic as well. As you see Only Goodness could have taken an unexpected turn completing altering the ending. Even if Atwood's statement proved true in a factual sense, people can take endings differently depending upon their understanding of the novel. Therefore making it all about how YOU slice it.
ReplyDeleteKaby couldn't post her response so I'm uploading it for her.
ReplyDeleteLahiri portrays Sudha and Rahul as teens with a rebellious attitude, one that doesn't nearly resemble the attitude of a commonly known Indian. This beginning could be considered a surprise for some since they would expect Sudha and Rahul to exhibit orthodox characteristics. The story then continues to follow a very expected path in which Rahul faces a drinking addiction which causes turmoil in various aspects of his life. Although this part of the plot is common, it still has an unusual twist to it, almost as if the story seems wrong and shouldn’t turn this way. The plot then takes a happy turn when Rahul returns to see Sudha after going to rehab. At this point, there is a hint of hope that the siblings will make decisions and live a way that represents the overarching past; India. Lahiri writes in a way that keeps us hoping for the best, only for good. It is fair for the audience to suspect that Rahul may fail to control his addiction when babysitting Neel, however they don’t. Carefully crafted Lahiri makes the reader believe that the climax is over and that we are rather at the conclusion of the story. But in reality, the story is reaching an intense moment with a turn that should have been expected. Only goodness is a short story that has a common plot with a surprising twist.
Once an alcoholic, always an alcoholic. This message within the text of "Only Goodness" is an overlay to how the story should be acknowledged. Rahul dealing with alcoholism is simply a way in which the author wishes to gain the attention of her audience. The plot which appears to be unfolding is of how the ignorance among every member in the family evolves as the story is told. In the story, it is brought up by Rahul that, "'Baba left India to get rich, and Ma married him because she had nothing else to. That was Rahul always aware of the family's weaknesses,'" (138) which offers a distinct allusion to the true story being written. Not only does Rahul's addiction lead him towards his utter downfall, but the parent's incessant compulsion with high achievement and hopes of success created a tense and undermining environment in the household. Yet, despite this, Sudha still surmounts to the most defeated character within the whole story. Her intentions of having Rahul, "leave his mark as a child in America" (136) only made herself more broken as she attempted to allow Rahul to have an honest connection with her, through sharing drinks to inviting him to her reception, but ultimately, by welcoming him to the idea of being an uncle. Her redemptive quality is the ignorance which led her into having her heart torn by entrusting Rahul with the care of her own child, and is the reason as to why this story is much more complex than just an eventful tale of an alcoholic's misfortunes.
ReplyDeleteGreat job keep it up John!
DeleteThe perils of alcoholism and the destruction it can cause to family relationships and connections is effectively depicted within Lahiri’s “Only Goodness”. The complex, but genuine development of the characters throughout the short story makes it a rather realistic template of a situation that may be frequent in family households and contemporary life. As like any other parent that wants the best for their children, it can be inferred that Rahul’s mother and father conditioned him to be a diligent and dedicated student; hence his acceptance into Cornell University. Although already introduced to alcohol by his sister, Sudha, Rahul is still depicted and seen as a stereotypical “good student” when his parents host the graduation party. But as the story progresses, Lahiri transitions from displaying Rahul as an individual of innocence to a young adult disconnected with reality, further adding to the complexity of character and plot development. Rahul’s new reputation of a college dropout and the fact that he works at a laundromat utterly alters his parent’s attitude toward him; their sense of pride for his accomplishments in the beginning of the story turns into sheer disappointment after his failure to maintain his place at Cornell due to his addiction. Rahul had turned into an infamous figure that the children of Bengali migrants aspired to be the complete opposite of by the end of the story. “And so he became what all parents feared, a blot, a failure, someone who was not contributing to the grand circle of accomplishments Bengali children were making across the country, as surgeons or attorneys or scientists, or writing articles for the front page of The New York Times” (Lahiri 151). The subtle changes in the characters’ attitudes and their mannerisms constructs a constantly changing plot that makes Lahiri’s “Only Goodness” an interesting yet unsettlingly realistic read.
ReplyDeleteKatie's account wouldn't let her post so this is her response:
ReplyDeleteThe story opens with a seemingly simple, yet incredibly telling sentence. “It was Sudha who’d introduced Rahul to alcohol, one weekend he came to visit her at Penn- to his first drink from a keg and then, the next morning in the dining hall, his first cup of coffee”. As Aiden mentioned, this seems innocent. I’m the younger sibling and the youngest cousin in a pretty big family, and all of my cousins and my older brother always tell me to go visit them at school, that I can party with them and get that sort of college experience. Although I haven’t gone to visit in that way, the act of an older sibling or cousin or friend sort of taking you under their wing and introducing you to more adult things seems like an almost normal thing to do. After reading the first sentence I was unsure of whether this would be a story of Sudha and Rahul’s friendship or a story about Rahul’s drinking problem, but it was clear that the story would be primarily revolved around Sudha as her name was the first mentioned. Lahiri is setting us up from the beginning however to know that this story does turn out to be of course about Sudha, with an enormous focus on Rahul and his problems. The first section of the story feels like it’s in the present, and it really just seems like sibling bonding. That being said, there are discrete clues that show how upset Rahul really is deep down inside, like when he seems to be disapproving of Sudha getting another master’s degree. I feel like Rahul is constantly living in his big sister’s shadow; she’s the oldest, the smartest, she is every parent’s dream child because in almost all aspects she is perfect. I think Rahul resents himself and his family for the obvious difference between them and the way they’re viewed- I think this plays into why Rahul chose to drink in the first place. The way Lahiri set up the story was interesting as well, and showed deeper into Sudha and Rahul’s relationship with each other and their parents. Lahiri switches between talking about the present and life before Rahul. This sort of showed me that, unfortunately, Rahul may be out of their lives once again. Another thing I noticed towards the very end of the story was how much Rahul had changed, for better and worse, and how much Sudha had to do with that, and how much guilt she must feel. Someone mentioned that the title, Only Goodness, refers to Sudha being the only true goodness Rahul had in his life, and while I agree with that, I also think that she was the one who inevitably caused so much of this. Of course it was Rahul’s choice to drink, but I would understand why Sudha would feel like it was her fault; every time they were together something would go wrong with him, and after all she was the first one to introduce him to alcohol. That being said, it is also mentioned that Sudha is the first one to give Rahul coffee, and at the end of the story, Rahul says that along with running, his new addiction is coffee. Although this a subtle reference to the first sentence, I think it shows how maybe Sudha showed him something destructive, but she also showed him something that allowed him to continue recovery for the brief amount of time, and when Rahul says that coffee is his new addiction, this is the first time anyone other than Sudha says out loud that Rahul has a problem. Even though they went their own ways and Rahul did eventually relapse, Sudha’s introductions to the adult world weren’t all bad; they helped Rahul gain courage and responsibility.
As many people have pointed out, Jhumpa Lahiri starts off “Only Goodness” with a bang. By stating that Sudha introduced Rahul to alcohol, she throws a pivotal piece of information at us immediately that both sets the story on its path and will eventually become especially relevant again at the climax. Since the story started off with such a firm piece of plot information, it is assumed by the reader that the plot will continue to move efficiently. But Lahiri takes her time with her characters, describing in detail the events of the exposition and rising action that build to the climax. Reading about every step Rahul took before he hit rock bottom gave me empathy for him, Sudha, and their parents as they watched Rahul struggle as his future slid away from him. Just before the climax is reached, as Dominica pointed out, the reader is starting to put their faith back in Rahul. He seems to be acting responsibly with Neel. He is showing reluctance for his past actions and claims to have recovered from the worst of his illness. And just as this happens, he betrays our newfound trust. After the climax is reached, the falling action and resolution move quickly again, just as quickly as Rahul disappeared again out of Sudha’s world. Lahiri altered the pace of the plot so that the reader felt as though they were experiencing the events themselves. As they occurred suddenly to the characters, they were brought upon the reader without warning. As they occurred slowly and over the course of time, the reader felt that passage of time. This allowed the reader to really empathize with the characters.
ReplyDeleteAlex Goldberg
ReplyDeleteAP Lit/Mr. Pellerin
9/11/17
Plot: Only Goodness
Despite the ups and downs of Rahul’s fortunes in “Only Goodness,” its plot nevertheless follows the foreshadowing of the first line: Sudha’s “[introducing] Rahul to alcohol” is the catalyst of the story’s plot, and serves as its poignant climax when Rahul almost kills his nephew (Lahiri, 128). At first glance, Lahiri’s exposition seems as if it sets up Rahul’s pedestal from which he will fall: Spoiled by his sister and raised “successfully” by his parents to go to the Ivy League, Rahul is the star child of the family and symbolizes their achievement in parenting (Lahiri, 129). However, on a second reading, foreshadowing of Rahul’s downward spiral is visible: By describing Rahul as Sudha’s brother “in name only,” Lahiri thus sets Rahul’s character as opposite to hers. Thus, when Lahiri describes Sudha’s virtues, Rahul’s fatal flaws are displayed: While “excess [does] not appeal to Sudha,” excess is at the root of Rahul’s problems throughout the short story, and when Sudha “learned what her limits were,” Rahul never does (Lahiri, 129). In my opinion, this is the essential plot of “Only Goodness,” described within the first two pages: Sudha introduces her pet brother to alcohol, and they grow into the inverses of each other, spurred by alcohol as a catalyst. While the rest of the story is filled with the specifics of Rahul’s fall and Sudha’s rise, their relative trajectories are unchanged, just as Atwood describes John’s and Mary’s deaths as the essential end of the story “however you slice [the middle]” (Norton, 22).
The story of Sudha, the unappreciated and seemingly thoroughly average older sister, is full of interpersonal strife within her family unit. These conflicts have taken different forms as she aged, though she has always filled the maternal role with her younger brother Rahul, who has been praised since birth. As the story progresses the reader is shown the intimate connection between the two siblings, with Sudha even going as far as to buy beer for her younger brother because she was doing the same at his age, and still yet, there is a fine line that Rahul has been crossed when his social drinking turns to binge drinking. Rahul began to change, he became disinterested in the family after he got engaged with a white woman.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile Sudha goes back to England to go to Oxford. Her parents had also lived there for a while under the roof of a kind Indian land lord who was nice enough to let them stay while very few other homes would allow non-whites to become tenants in England at the time. While Sudha is in the art museum, she comes across a painting and in turn meets her husband Roger. As opposed to the Rahul’s marriage, this one is actually approved of on Sudha’s side, yet none of Roger’s friends or family actually go to his wedding. Rahul tried to make a toast at their wedding yet he was told to sit down because he was too drunk.
Fast forward 6 months, Sudha and Roger move in together and they have a son named Niel. Rahul wants to see his nephew so he traveled out to England as soon as he could have paid for it. (And that must have taken a long time considering that he makes Omelettes for a living, and even still you have to appreciate the fact that he had everything going for him early and still managed to throw it all away over booze.) Trajedy strikes the family when they find baby Niel in the cold bathwater all alone while Rahul’s body lay inert, clothes unpacked. The selection ends with him leaving back on an airplane, never to return to their home again.
The plot shifted from focusing on Rahul as the centerpiece of the household, of a bastion of inherent knowledge and virtue but then turns into a person who his own family can scarcely remember. His actions rotted out his foundation of innocence and lead his astray down the path of sorrow, and he did it to himself. Had Rahul taken heed when Sudha tried to save him from himself, he wouldn’t have had to live a life of poverty and hardship, and by flunking out of college he further cemented his own failure to chase a dream down a rabbit hole from which he could never return.
Nick
DeleteJhumpa Lahiri’s “Only Goodness” details the slow, spiraling descent of a former star pupil and son into a wayward alcoholic. It has a fairly linear progression, and jumps at various points throughout both Rahul’s story and his sister Sudha’s own life. Told mostly from her perspective. Her perspective throughout the story is mostly regretful and melancholic, as shown in the opening line: “It was Sudha who’d introduced Rahul to alcohol” (128). From there the text builds up Rahul to be both everything his parents wanted and without Sudha’s shortcomings. A tall, handsome young man, accepted to Cornell, on a path to success. But all it took was that one sip of alcohol to turn it all around. The reader is always aware of some underlying tension, in fact his many habits, like constantly sneaking of unexplained, slowly become more evident as the plot progresses. It finally erupts as, in only a few short pages, he drops out and gets arrested. It's interesting to note the reverse duality between the lives of the brother and sister; as Rahul’s situation gets worse and worse, Sudha’s gets better between schooling in London and meeting Roger. The climax of the story, in my opinion, is when Rahul runs away from home. This is when the differences between siblings is most stark, a fact that Sudha picks up on when she is “recalling the existence that had produced them both” (159). This quote is meant to question just how two people born of the same mother and raised in the same home could turn out so different. And of course, there is the false sense of hope when Rahul returns and subsequently fails once more. But not only does he fail to keep Neel safe, the most important development in this part of the story was that he failed his sister for the last time. With a life literally on the line, Sudha must finally come to terms with fact that, even if her parents cannot, “she [is] capable” of rejecting her brother (171). And so the story ends on such a sour note, but in a way this conclusion was inevitable: Rahul was never able to get sustained help with his alcoholism. Overall, Rahul's struggle with addiction develops slowly at first, with sneaking beer cans and talking back to his sister and parents. But towards the end, the conflict escalates to a point where even the reader feels uneasy leaving him alone with Neel.
ReplyDeleteBoth Baldwin and Ta-Nehisi Coates describe the strong supremacist attitude that people hold back then and now. Although the lynchings were in the past and have been banned, a new form of division is being created by Trump's presidency and present society. Instead of showing the lynching in the eyes of a black man, Baldwin talks in the perspective of a white man, trying to show their beliefs and ideas. He never uses language that blames them in any way but rather describes their perspective. Using the experience of a child, who views his first lynching Baldwin shows the audience how such extreme ideas form. An overwhelming experiencing with hundreds of engaged spectators encourage Jesse to follow suit, despite his personal views. Although he has no clear reason to hate the man, Jesse feels it is right, for so many people among him simply cannot be wrong. Baldwin indicates that mob mentality and group thinking has created the largest issues from the 20th century in respect to racism. During the lynching, the audience were actively participating throughout the event, putting all their efforts into the task. The momentum created by such a confident group seems impossible to challenge, making it simple to follow along. Prior to the lynching, the impulses that a group forms is heavily seen. The entire scene was almost like a celebration, a moment of rejoicing as everyone blends into one powerful essence of life. Haunting with its vivid description, the potential that humans have to be evil is clear. The extent of racist beliefs go far enough to take children to a gory murder, injecting hatred without reason. In present day, discrimination still lives on. Although the form of discrimination has evolved, the effects and consequences they present are strikingly similar. In reference to Trump’s administration, Ta-Nehisi explains that the common supremacist belief in working “half as hard as a black man” .Though trump doesn't target black people with his full potential, he encourages and amplifies the pieces of discrimination left within our nation. It becomes clear that the white race was a driving force, the strongest during the election. Overall, it is clear that discrimination and racism are strongly evident within our society, in the past and present. It is our responsibility to make the greatest attempts to eliminate the division among us.
ReplyDelete- Kaby Maheswaran