Something this story shares with Rushdie, and even with the first story by Anita Desai we read in class, is the sense that time is malleable, non-linear. We have spoken in class of the idea of recurrence in the Hindu religion. This erases the distinction between past and future. At the beginning of the story, Mistry writes, "Dr. Mody did not know it then, but . . . " Then Mistry basically gives away what will happen later in the story to Dr. Mody. There is the sense that this story has already happened even as it is unfolding on the page for the reader. The shadow of Dr. Mody's death is present even in the joyous moments of the story. Two years is an atypically long time frame for a short story, but it makes sense if past and future aren't much different.
This approach to fiction eliminates "surprise" for the reader. It's not even surprising when Mrs. Bulsara reveals that she destroyed the prize stamp of her husband's collection. This is another aspect of the novels we've read. Readers will be frustrated if they're looking for plot-driven fiction. My question is are these works of literature dramatic? Why do we care to read about people whose fates seem to be decided from the beginning? Is it because the characters are interesting and the language is beautiful?
No comments:
Post a Comment