Thursday, October 5, 2017
Due Friday, October 6th - Narration & Point-of-View
Read "Narration & Point-of-View" pages 66-69 in the Norton Anthology. Apply your knowledge of narration and POV to the short story "Unaccustomed Earth" by Jhumpa Lahiri. We will explore a story in class tomorrow so please bring your Norton Anthology texts to class.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In Jhumpa Lahiri’s “Unaccustomed Earth”, the idea of the limitations of the point of view a character offers is important to the story in and of itself. Having both Ruma and her father narrate there own personal viewpoints introduces to the reader a dynamic that allows for much more insight into the characters. If there was only Ruma narrating the visit from her father, then we would never have known about his illustrious romance and his personal, internal battle over how to tell his daughter and worrying about how she would react to his life after her mothers death. Also, if it was only Ruma’s father narrating, we would not know about her depression and insecurities in her marriage and at home. We would have just seen a successful, mother, daughter and wife who lives in a big house with a husband who has a high paying job. This goes into the problem with how having one narrator causes a sort of distortion. Like I just mentioned, without having both Ruma and her father as narrators, we would have never known about their internal struggles, and those struggles are what make this piece of writing so impactful. Knowing about how Ruma feels deprssed from her mothers death, and how she worries about her marriage makes her more real to us. Ruma and her father would not be as relatable to the reader, we would not have seen them full circle unless we have that inside into their thoughts, which is were the most impactful aspects of a story can come from. Being able to see the contrast of characters and delve into their inner most struggles allowed me to be able to truly enjoy the story as a whole.
ReplyDeleteSosha Stecher
ReplyDeleteUnaccustomed Earth flips back and forth between Ruma and her father’s point of view. This allows the reader into the mind of both characters, and lets them experience their different emotions. Ruma grapples with her father’s transition and life after the death of her mother, and her father adapts to his new life as well, while feeling somewhat guilty as he keeps the secret that he’s started seeing another woman. Their emotions are somewhat conflicting, and it feels as though Jhumpa Lahiri created almost two sides to an “argument” with the way she narrates to show both perspectives. Both characters are processing the same event differently, and the reader has access to both of their experiences. As a reader, I felt drawn to both characters, and felt an emotional connection and sympathy to both as well. I understood why they would be feeling or acting a certain way, based on the information Lahiri shared with the reader. I believe that this ability is because of the narration, since Lahiri allows a deeper reader connection through being omnipresent and revealing both character’s thoughts. The author’s persona is one of observation. As the narrator, she’s not personally commenting or biased towards either character, which helps the reader feel the burdens and emotions of both Ruma and her father equally. I do wonder what it would have felt like if she only shared Rumas father’s point of view. Would the reader side with him more, and feel as though Ruma is unfairly judging his transition to a new life and his ability to be with another woman and be happy so soon after his wife’s death? It’s hard to imagine the story without both perspectives.
Cat Weiner
ReplyDeleteThe focus of “Unaccustomed Earth” is subtle yet intricate. The decision that Jhumpa Lahiri made to focus on the characters simply living their normal lives in an average household is very powerful. She taps into the idea that everyone has personal thoughts and secrets that are not seen to the public. The domestic aspects frame the plot so that the focal point of the story lies within the characters minds. Without using such a focus, the internal meaning of the story would not have shown as effectively. Also, the use of third person point of view allows Lahiri to effortlessly communicate ideas from both the father and daughter’s perspectives. I agree with what Jyllian said- without this aspect the story would have been completely skewed. Through the way that each character’s thoughts are communicated, the story has an omniscient or “all-knowing” narrator. This helps support the argumentative aspect of the story that Sosha just mentioned. Lahiri’s narration and point of view choices greatly influence the portrayal of the story.
By definition, Unaccustomed Earth is a story with unlimited point of view because there is more than one character narrating, Ruma and her dad. But, with Jhumpa's writing style and the characters' narration, I thought there was still more to be said/shown so it technically having 'unlimited' point of view confused me.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading the father's perspective more than Ruma's because I was unfamiliar with his inner self, but I was familiar with Ruma as a character. Jhumpa did a nice job of giving perspectives from Ruma and her dad without using first person, but I feel it took away from the possibility of a more personal relationship between narrator and reader. My opinion on the narration and point of view of the short story isn't clearly defined but I hope tomorrow in class, with the discussion, I'll be able to make it less ambiguous, and it's also fine if I don't.
In “Unaccustomed Earth” I think the fact that there was an unlimited viewpoint is what made me love it so much. Most novels (at least of the ones I’ve read) have a limited viewpoint which, as Domenica said, helps strengthen the narrator/audience relationship, but I feel like it can also close off the rest of the world to the reader. The unlimited viewpoint allows us as readers to not just develop one biased relationship with the novel, but be able to see it from a more holistic and open minded point of view. If we only heard Ruma’s point of view, we would probably think very little of her father, not in a malevolent way, but because we’re only hearing one side to the story. In life, one of my strongest beliefs is the importance in seeing and understanding the point of view and motives of everyone around you, and with an unlimited viewpoint as strong as the one seen in “Unaccustomed Earth” we are able to not only have sympathy for the characters, but really just get who they are and why.
ReplyDeleteIn Jhumpa Lahiri's “Unaccustomed Earth,” she uses the third-person point of view to reflect upon the inner thoughts of both Ruma and her father. This narration allowed me to obtain a broader understanding of the story because I could see the situation through different focal points. Lahiri begins the story with Ruma’s father coming to visit her and her son in Seattle after his wife’s death and she ends it with his departure. The narration gave extra information about the characters that they themselves did not know about. For instance, the narrator revealed to the reader that Ruma’s father was dating another woman before Ruma’s character discovers this towards the end. I thought that Lahiri's decision to alternate from one point of view to the other was utilized really well because, like Sosha said, it allowed me to feel an emotional connection to the characters as they who dealt with this situation in different ways. Each character’s background was needed in order for the story to work. Ruma and her father’s personal thoughts and perceptions were what connected the two together. If I had only been exposed to one of the character’s point of view, then I would not have thought that the story was as deep or as meaningful.
ReplyDeleteThe two points in “Unaccustomed Earth”, as several other people have said, creates a less biased story. Had the point of view of either Ruma or her father been absent, I would not have understood the other character as much. Because we can see from both points of view, it allows us to see why their strained relationship is both of their faults. If we had just seen Ruma’s point of view, I probably would have completely blamed Ruma’s father for their lack of closeness, but because her father’s point of view is also shared, it let me see that Ruma was also to blame for their distant relationship. By having the two points of view, it also added a sense of anticipation. I waited for Ruma to learn that her father was dating another woman, and I was eager to see her reaction to this knowledge. If her father did not have a point of view, then I would not have been anticipating anything than closure on their relationship, so the dual points of view added another layer of complexity and slight suspense. Having the two points of view also humanized the other character. I think that from Ruma, I saw her father as a distant, unfeeling person, but my opinion of him was completely altered when I saw from his point of view. I also think that if I had only seen from her father’s point of view, Ruma would seem ungrateful, but I could understand her actions because I saw from her point of view. This story would not have the same complexity or layers had there only been one point of view.
ReplyDeleteKaby Maheswaran
ReplyDeleteEvery point of view has its purpose, most of the time these are universal ideas we all recognize. Jhumpa Lahiri’s Unaccustomed Earth short story is successfully communicated through careful use of narration and point of view. The use of an unlimited point of view helped the audience understand the uncertainty that Ruma was experiencing in respect to Bengali traditions. As a person who has adapted to the American culture, Ruma is reluctant to have her father stay with her family. This idea may be foreign to many of the readers for they do not have an emigrant’s experience. Using the unlimited point of view, Ruma’s struggle with balancing the two cultures is seen. Although she is unsatisfied with a life as a housewife, Ruma does not take any great measures to change it. The unlimited point of view also opens up an opportunity to see the situation from Ruma’s dad’s perspective. Ruma’s dad also senses a distance that was inevitably created by lack of communication. The old Bengali traditions are urging them to reconnect, however present adaptations force them to stay away. Ruma can’t explain to her father the uncomfort that comes with living as a big family. Ruma’s dad is unable to communicate to Ruma about his personal life. Both characters fail to connect because of strict bengali traditions of marriage and family life. If the point of view came from just one character, this idea would not be clearly conveyed. The unlimited point of view is also essential for the ending, where Ruma finds the postcard. If Lahiri didn’t switch between the perspectives of Ruma and her dad, it would have been impossible to bend the reality for the reader. The reader would have simply assumed that the two characters would live under the Bengali culture, hiding away their personal desires. Narration and plot are crucial for Unaccustomed Earth when conveying the idea to the audience.
In Jhumpa Lahiri’s Unaccustomed Earth, accentuates and highlights its messages by using an omniscient narrator to give insight into two characters, Ruma and her father, and their relationship. The narration of the story is structured around a omniscient and in depth knowledge of Ruma and her father’s inner thoughts, feelings, and histories, connected by straightforward telling of events in the present. We read of Ruma’s relationship to her mother, and specifically her mother's death. We see that her mother's absence from her life has lead her to think of her often, making her feel closer to her in death than she had been in life, a grief that provides a sense of normalcy and an on going relationship with someone who is not there. On the other hand, we also get insights into the thoughts and memories of her father. The reader learns very early on that Ruma’s father has actually moved on, having fallen in love with another woman during his travels. For Ruma, moving on from her mother's death and having her leave her thoughts is a sign that she didn’t love or miss her. But through the omniscient narration of her father's thoughts and experiences, we know the opposite is true, that moving on with your life after a tragedy is necessary and positive. Ruma realizes this at the very end of the story, discovering her father's love letter to another woman, seeing that her father still honored her mother through the flower he planted, and sending the letter to its intended recipient anyway, accepting that the dead don’t leave you if you move on and stop grieving. In any other story, the discovery of the postcard would have been the twist at the very end that teaches the main character and the reader the lesson. But the constant omniscient narration informed us of her father's new love very early on, showing us the moral then. Ruma is the very last person to catch on, her father having found new love in her son having no memory of her mother at all. By having this omniscient narration do this, providing the inner emotions of one who has accepted the lesson and one who hasn’t, it makes the lesson far more meaningful and important, a universal truth that is difficult but necessary to accept rather than a last minute lesson revealed at the end and given no time to sink into the story.
ReplyDeleteHaving more than one narrator and more than one point of view gives a more comprehensive understanding of the story and allows a deeper connection with the characters. In Jumpa Lahiri’s “Unaccustomed Earth”, both main characters, Ruma and her father, express their respective point of views and narrate their side of the story and events. Have Lahiri opted for the more traditional way of allowing one main character to be the sole narrator, the reader would have missed a lot of details about the other character, what and how they think and what their interior struggles are. If Ruma didn’t express her point of view, the reader would have seen in her a happy woman who quit a successful law career to become a caring mother and a supportive wife to a well-off husband. No one would have ever guessed her depression after the loss of her mother, the uncertainties surrounding her marriage, and her dilemma of destroying her father’s happiness after she learned about the new woman in his life. In the same token, if the father didn’t relate his side of the story, the reader would not have guessed that he was actually enjoying some kind of independence after the loss of his wife and was in a relationship with another woman. The choice of having multiple narrators and point of views instead of one perspective, allows the reader to get the whole picture rather than one side of the story. It is the duality between Ruma’s interior struggles and those of her father that made the story so impactful and the characters so realistic and relatable. We could connect to them, understand what they feel and also have less bias towards the only one narrating the story like it usually happens.
ReplyDeleteNicholas Carroll
ReplyDeleteThe viewpoint in Jhumpa Lahiri's novel switches over the course of this novel, which directly relates to the reading in our reading in the Houston Smith book in that the author uses these techniques to convey to us something about the novel. By controlling her perspectives like a director would control a camera, we are shown parts of the story up close and personal through both a 3rd person limited point of view. In making this decision, Lahiri gave us a perspective of one character, and then can switch to another and give their side of the story. By showing the dynamic interplay between each individual family member, we can enter their world and at times place ourselves in the footsteps of the lives these characters lead. It perfectly follows the journey of these people, it shows us all the details of how they came to America and all the baggage they had from their previous lives affecting them in the present. Had she chosen a first person point of view with a single narrator, we would've lost a lot of the book and we wouldn't be able to understand the family's motivations as well, and of course second person probably wouldn't work either as that may have been an even more limited format to convey the story through. She gives us the freedom of third person but chose to reign it in on omniscient. An unlimited POV might have given away much of the drama of the story. So then, I suppose she made the artistic decision to recant her vision to us with.
Sometimes, what a writer chooses not to do can be just as or even more telling than what he or she chooses to do. As many of my classmates have already pointed out, Jhumpa Lahiri chooses to narrate Unaccustomed Earth in a third-person point of view, affording her an unlimited narration of the story and versatility to jump between the thoughts of Ruma and her father. After reading the first few pages in Chapter 2 Norton Anthology, however, I realized how many other wrinkles Lahiri could have thrown into her narration: she could have told the story from Ruma's perspective while casting her as an unreliable narrator who is too quick to judge her father, told the story through Akash's eyes and utilized central consciouness to portray either Ruma or the father as the antagonist through their various flaws, or made the reader directly walk in Ruma's shoes by using second person narration. All of these tactics would have led to a more traditional short story with easily an definable exposition, rising action, climax, falling action, and conclusion. But Lahiri chooses to do none of these things. Instead she uses the most basic narration available to convey a sense of simplicity that is often a more realistic portrayal of family life. No one is absolutely good or evil in Unaccustomed Earth, Lahiri is simply presenting a problem faced by countless families and using her admirable grip over rhetoric to make it interesting. Personally, I found this take to be a refreshing new version of the short story and thoroughly enjoyed it.
ReplyDeleteThe third person narration in Unaccustomed Earth really contributes to the portrayal of the characters. As readers, the narration allows us to gain insight into not only the actions, but also the feelings of the main characters, a feature we would not have if they story was told by only Ruma or her father. We also don't have an bias or an unreliable narrator because a third person has no need to contribute to a bias. Additionally, I think that a third person narrative contributes an aspect of frankness that makes small events signifiant. For example, when Ruma's father left the letter at her house and she decided to mail it, there was something about the tone of the narrator that really made it a powerful moment, even though it wasn't as if anything huge was happening. The subtleties of Lahiri's stories are supported by the omnipresent narrator. I also think that Ruma's father being simply " Ruma's father" and not being given a name was significant because to Ruma, that is all he was. He wasn't a man whose wife just died, he wasn't someone with passions and interests, he was just her dad, and this story was anchored on the basis that Ruma is forced to see her father in a new light.
ReplyDeleteIn the story Unaccustomed Earth by Jhumpa Lahiri, the reader sees the story from the point of view of both Ruma and her father. Because there are several perspectives, the story has “unlimited points of view”. This type of perspective is useful when an author aims to give additional details about plot and characters. While one point of view is helpful when an author wants the reader to resonate specifically with one character, using multiple points of view is an easier route to allow readers to see the story as a whole. I think that if Lahiri wrote this story from just Ruma’s perspective, then the reader would have a different, more biased view of Ruma’s father. In that case, the reader would be set up to think more like Ruma, and they would have more of a negative attitude towards her father. I think that using “unlimited points of view” added to this story, because the reader was able to understand the story as a whole instead of from a biased point of view.
ReplyDeleteThe way in which Lahiri switches off between narrators in Unaccustomed Earth creates a dramatic irony that allows the reader to know what both characters are thinking even though the characters themselves are unaware. The reader is made aware of the father's new love interest from the beginning of the story but Ruma is kept in the dark. This creates a feeling of suspense. Furthermore, Lahiri makes the reader become emotionally attached to the father through his garden and his kindness towards Akash. This makes the reader even more painfully aware of the fact that Ruma will inevitably be unsuccessful in getting her father to stay. The irony is finally broken at the end of the story when Ruma finds her father's letter to Mrs. Bagchi and becomes aware of his lover. It seems almost appropriate that Ruma finds this letter as payback to her father’s deception. In my opinion Ruma’s father should have revealed his love for Mrs. Bagchi at the beginning. Even though her father’s love would have most likely been frowned upon in India, Ruma, being fully assimilated into American society, would likely have approved of her father’s actions. I think that if the characters had been aware of everything that the reader was aware of, the situation would not have been so awkward and delicate.
ReplyDeleteThe point of views aren’t limited anymore with the perspective from both Ruma and her father because we get to dig into their brains to see their thoughts, but also zoom out to see what’s happening around them. This particular structure also increases our desire to read more because the two characters don’t know what each other is thinking when us, as readers, do. It allows us to be attached to the characters as well. Like what others had said before, with only one narrator or one perspective, the story will be more biased and limited because there are times when we can’t zoom out to see what’s happening to other characters.
ReplyDeleteA lack of suspense and unknowingness often leads to a loss of interest in a narrative. In contrast, Jhumpa Lahiri’s “Unaccustomed Earth” is able to attain the reader’s interest throughout the entire story through the employment of “unlimited points of view” and by constantly keeping the reader at the edge of their seat. Her use of both Ruma’s and her father’s perspective as a means of detailing the events that occur during her father’s visit to Seattle made for a compelling storyline; the fact that Ruma’s reaction to her father’s newfound lover was unpredictable left me in total suspense and kept my eyes “glued” to the pages. But, while the story kept me in suspense in terms of how each character would react to another’s secrets, I was well informed of their thoughts throughout the narrative. This purposeful combination of uncertainty of outcome and all-knowing perception of Ruma’s and her father’s thoughts enabled the reader to predict her father’s inevitable confession to Ruma, yet be completely oblivious as to how she would react. Lahiri’s decision to use multiple points of view in this short story enabled the reader to witness the development of each individual character at a comprehensive level.
ReplyDeleteUnaccustomed Earth by Jhumpa Lahiri is a short story like no other I have come across as a reader. Obviously the content was unique, but the writing style provided me with an enhanced understanding of character development in terms of both Ruma and her father. Lahiri was able to achieve this by incorporating two different point of views into her writing which I have never seen before. This allowed for the story to be more unlimited and I personally enjoyed it more as I felt like I was reading the “whole story” and not just a specific character's thoughts. The switching back and forth between point of views and focus contributed to the more stable connection I was able to make to both characters. It was set up in such a way that I was able to empathize with both and not favor one over the other allowing for a more unbiased read in my opinion. For say, if only Ruma’s point of view was shared I most likely would not have been able to connect with aspects of the father and his yearn for independence, but instead would of had to do more guesswork pertaining to his role in the story. Overall readers are able to dive deeper into this story as well as the characters lives. Lahiri’s choice to take an unlimited route when writing this story created next level connections between the characters and audience and made for a worthwhile read.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteJhumpa Lahiri uses point of view in order to fully immerse the reader into the world that she has depicted. We are able to see and examine all perspectives, from Ruma’s self doubt to her father’s hidden love life. There is no judgement shown because we as readers are able to fill the shoes of both characters, learning what they see and their motivations behind their actions. Lahiri also utilizes perspective in order to show the disconnect between the daughter and the father. Both characters think that they know what the other is feeling, that they understand the inner workings of the other’s mind. By flipping between perspectives the reader gains an understanding that the characters don’t, and we are able to see the lack of communication between Ruma and her father. This story touches upon the private life of an individual, and what one chooses to share with the people closest to them. This is supported by the use of perspective and the ability to see the reasoning of characters that otherwise would be inscrutable.
In “Unaccustomed Earth” by Jhumpa Lahiri, the point of view is defined as unlimited, because both Ruma and her Father narrate the story. I really enjoyed this style of writing, especially in the form of a short story. In other works I have read, I have encountered ultimate point of view, but mostly in longer books so it is divided by chapters. In this short story, the switches in point of view helped Lahiri give many details in a concise way. It helped me too see both sides of the story. Like many others have said, if Lahiri had only used one perspective the piece would be more biased. I think that reading from only Ruma’s point of view the father would seem selfish and distant, but because of the ultimate style we know there's more to the story. I think that this narration style also created more interest in the story. When reading from the father’s view, I learned things that Ruma did not yet know, for example his girlfriend. This made me excited to keep reading because I wanted to know what Ruma would think when she found out. Overall, Lahiri’s use of point of view allowed me to make more connections to the story than one of a traditional style.
ReplyDeleteI feel as though there is a constant tension between Ruma and her father. It is best presented in the form that we have become accustomed to reading Lahiri: as an almost omnipotent, unlimited, third-person narrator. I personally did not like the story but must admit that the more objective viewpoint presented from an outside figure greatly increased the story's quality. For example, the reader does not necessarily know what Ruma does with the information that her father has begun dating a woman stateside. That chapter leaves off on almost a cliffhanger, not quote fully explaining the whole family's reaction while still letting out enough details to throw the reader for a loop. A more personalized, emotional narrating voice might have ruined such a reveal by needlessly going in depth with the relationship, instead of letting the reader wonder to his or her heart's content.
ReplyDelete