How does Jhumpa Lahiri use the minor action and subtle details to express the unmet needs of the characters?

     There are many minor details and subtle things throughout the short story, Interpreter of Maladies, that seem unimportant. However, there is a reason behind all those subtle details and it is to reveal the flaws and  lack of unity among the Das family. In the story, almost every member of the Das family has an object that preoccupies them from spending time with the rest of the family. Mina, the mother of the family, polishes her nails during the car ride and ignores her daughter's pleas. Discouraged by her mother's indifference, Tina (the daughter), just plays with her doll throughout the car ride. Likewise the father, Raj, doesn't make an effort to converse with his family, but keeps his eyes glued to his book about India, or takes pictures with his camera to please his own interests.
     However, there are even more subtle details and minor actions that exemplify the family's lack of unity. During the car ride to the Sun Temple, Tina constantly plays with the lock on the car door. Although it seemed insignificant at first, Mr. Kapasi (tour guide) says, "... but Mrs. Das said nothing to stop her." (Mr. Kapasi 61) If Mina really cared for her daughter and considered her young daughter's safety, she would have stopped her from playing with the door. This situation shows that Mina doesn't really love her family like she should. Similarly, at the very end of the story, the flaws of the Das family are portrayed through a very interesting scene. Bobby is harassed by a large group of monkeys and the quote the narrator says after chasing away the monkeys is, "the slip of paper with Mr. Kapasi's address on it fluttered away in the wind. He watched as it rose, carried higher and higher by the breeze, into the trees where the monkeys now sat, solemnly observing the scene below." This scene was the most memorable for me because I felt as if the monkeys felt sorry for the Das family. Naturally lively and jocular in nature, monkeys rarely remain still, but I guess even the monkeys saw the sad flaws of the family, because they stayed still and solemn.

What's the motivation??

In Introduction, Tobias Wolff talks about the history of the short story, but more importantly, he explains the purpose behind good writing and the objective of reading good writing. According to Tobias Wolff, writing and reading are things that, “require isolation as the price of the best society.” (Wolff 6) Wolff believes that reading or writing literature puts people into a whole new world where ideas can be given or exchanged better than real society, which is why he describes it as “the best society.” Also, a writer’s objective of writing good literature is to move people and to plant their ideas and opinions about current issues in our world into the minds’ of their readers. However, in order to move someone with writing, the writing must have literary depth and the story should, “somehow take on flesh and blood” (Wolff 16) and come to life. This is also another purpose for writers to write good writing. To make their literature come to life in the readers’ minds so that the influence and the impact the writing has on the reader lasts forever. “They live and die, and yet do not die.” (Wolff 16) According to Wolff this eternal impact is something that can only be found in literature, which again, is why he describes the world of literature as the best society.

Now that we know Wolff’s explanation of the purpose of good writing, by reflecting on the information above, it is quite easy to realize what the readers’ motivation to read good writing is. Readers read good writing to be influenced. They want to know the writer’s opinion and they want to feel the text come alive in their minds. Additionally, readers want to relate to the honesty of the writing, so that they know what other people are thinking, and so that they know that they are not the only ones who are afraid to face some of the horrible truths of mankind, that are often the subjects in short stories. “As it happens, many of the stories in this book confront difficult material: violence, sickness, alcoholism, sexual exploitation, marital breakup.” (Wolff 14)

            

The Bass, the River, and Sheila Mant

Recently, a divided interest gave me a very tough time. Tennis and basketball have always been my favorite sports from when I was little, but as I grew up tennis became more and more important to me. Basketball was just a recreational sport and tennis emerged as something I had to be good at no matter what. Unable to resist the fun and team bonding experiences with the other guys on the team, I played for my school’s varsity basketball team last year. Although we had a very bad season, full of losses rather than wins, I have to admit, it was so much fun. Forming close relationships with the other guys on the team was a valuable experience, and getting to know so many new faces enhanced my social life. However this year, after much thought, I decided not to try out for basketball. Although basketball provided me with so many valuable things, I couldn’t stop thinking about how much I worried about tennis throughout the basketball season, and I think that worry distracted me, resulting in a horrible performance from myself. Additionally, recovering from the three months of almost no tennis was extremely hard work and I think that affected my academics negatively as well.

            After reading the memoir, The Bass, the River, and Sheila Mant, by W.D. Wetherell, I realized that my situation with tennis and basketball was a lot like Wetherall’s divided interest with the largemouth bass and Sheila Mant. In the memoir, Wetherall couldn’t let go of the bass that was on his line throughout the whole date out in the river with Sheila Mant. Although he describes Sheila as a goddess in the beginning of the memoir, he couldn’t resist his obsession and love for fishing, even when he had what he had wanted so badly right in front of him: Sheila Mant. So the question, “which one did he really want, the bass or Sheila?” arises and I think the author finds the answer to that question at the end of the story, unfortunately by picking the wrong answer. At the end, Wetherall cuts the line and gives up the bass to devote his mind towards Sheila, but discovers that Sheila has absolutely no interest in him. I hope I have cut the right line for my divided interests.

           

            Throughout the whole date in the memoir, there are hints and clues that help us foreshadow that Wetherall’s relationship with Sheila Mant will be unsuccessful. During the date, Sheila says, “ I think fishing’s dumb. I mean, it’s boring and all. Definitely dumb.” This comment exemplifies how inconsiderate Sheila Mant is and because she says that to someone who is so passionate about fishing, we can foreshadow that Wetherall and Sheila’s relationship will be unsuccessful. Additionally, during Wetherall and Sheila’s conversations, Sheila only talks about another guy named Eric and herself. She never shows any signs of interest in Wetherall, and this also helps us foreshadow the outcome of their relationship. 

THe meaning of the title "No News From Auschwitz"

     No News From Auschwitz was an article written by A. M. Rosenthal, talking about his experiences of visiting Auschwitz, one of, if not, the most famous extermination camp, that was used to kill Jews during the Holocaust. However, I'd like to talk about the purpose and implied meanings of his article's title "No News form Auschwitz." The question, "Why did Rosenthal write an article about something with no news?" is a question that will inevitably run through the readers' minds. However, if you read the text, and fully comprehend Rosenthal's opinions, then it is very clear to see that the title, "No News From Auschwitz" reflects the meaning of his article very well. 

     Throughout the whole article, there is clear evidence that Rosenthal wants the world to remember the Holocaust's horrors and terrors as it actually happened. This stance can be seen in many of the things he says. 

     "For every visitor there is one particular bit of horror that he knows he will never forget. For some it is seeing the rebuilt gas chamber at Oswiecim and being told that this is the “small one.” For others it is the fact that at Brzizinka, in the ruins of the gas chambers and the Crematoria the Germans blew up when they retreated, there were daisies growing." (412 Rosenthal)

     Through this quote we can see that shying away from the horrors of the Holocaust and denying the facts, is what Rosenthal fears the most and thinks is the most terrible thing that could possibly happen. 

     Now that we've understood Rosenthal's opinion, interpreting the meaning of the title is very easy. What Rosenthal means by "No news" means that he has nothing new to report about the horrors of the Holocaust.  Instead, he is reporting his experiences of going to Auschwitz to remind the readers once again of the horrors of the Holocaust and to send the message, that denying the terrors of the Holocaust would be the most terrible thing people could do. One of Rosenthal’s quotes in his article summarizes my interpretations very clearly.

            “There is merely the compulsion to write something about it, a compulsion that grows out of a restless feeling that to have visited Auschwitz and then turned away without having said or written anything would somehow be a most grievous act of discourtesy to those who died here.” (Rosenthal 412)

This article belongs in the Op-ed category of the Opinion Section of the New York Times. Op-Ed stands for “Opposite of the Editorial Page” and it is a newspaper article that openly expresses the writer’s opinions. This writer doesn’t have to be affiliated with the editorial board of the New York Times. Rosenthal had retired from working at the New York Times when he had written this article, and that’s why his article, which contained opinion in it, was included in the Op-ed section of the newspaper.