The End of a Journey ... Or the Beginning?

From page 280 onwards to the end of the book, WOW there is a lot of crazy stuff happening. The plot is so juicy and contains so much vital information. It is also extremely rich in literary devices and criticisms!



From a Feminist Point of View
GET YOUR FEMINIST GLASSES ON RIGHT NOW AND DON'T YOU DARE TAKE THEM OFF. I could not even get 3 pages into this section without SOMETHING going on involving feminist criticism... Why does Jimmy just decide to like married women now?? Who is this woman, what is her name, how about we give her a name and a backstory instead of saying "She was a fine woman with real tits and problems of her own" (p 285) and not treat her like an object?? I spy with my little eye MALE GAZE.

He doesn't even remotely care about this woman, but asks her to leave her husband only for him. Why is he so demanding of someone that he doesn't care about? Why did Atwood do this? I think she did this to really develop the character that Jimmy was becoming. To show us that, no Jimmy isn't perfect and he can really be disrespectful. This adds so much depth to Jimmy's character and who he's become, because I recall very early in the novel he cared greatly about his mother (chapter 2 subsection "Lunch") and Wakulla Price (p 55), but as he becomes older he doesn't care about women as much as he previously did.

Where Have I Seen This Before?
On page 290, The Great Gatsby just popped up in my head, "It figured, Jimmy thought: in the olden days, bootleggers had seldom been drunks" (p 290). This allowed me to compare and contrast not only these two very different novels, but also very different points in time. Jay Gatsby was similar to a bootlegger in the late 1910s and early 1920s, which is how he earned his money. The fact that something that was happening 100 years ago in present-day time is being referenced in a novel set in the future is really surprising. Could it be that Atwood was trying to allow readers to contrast the huge differences between the past and what could be the future?

A Little Alliteration Association

"Unlike the latter species, the bonobo had not been partially monogamous with polygamous and polyandrous tendencies. Instead it had been indiscriminately promiscuous, had not pair bonded" (p 293). Why did she write this? The bonobo species weren't monogamous.. instead they were polygamous and polyandrous... they had more than one lover and they didn't form any close relationships with their sexual partners. This directly correlates to Jimmy on page 285 when he has multiple relationships with married women and doesn't end up having any long-term relationships with any of them. Alliteration, but also compare and contrast between the bonobo species and the "new" Jimmy.... well done Atwood. 

Foreshadowing Hidden in the Shadows

At multiple points in the novel Crake was very suspicious, especially when he says, " "It's an airlock," said Crake "As in spaceships. [...] In case this place ever has to be sealed off," said Crake. "Hostile bioforms, toxin attacks, fanatics. The usual." " (p 298). All of the description words Crake used, the reader could then use later to describe what HE was doing. I got a very eerie feeling when I read this... and later I found out why. Those words were deliberately used to be exact descriptions of what Crake was planning.. "hostile bioforms" "toxin attacks". The way Atwood exploits foreshadowing in ways that are difficult to notice really add depth to the story, because it seems as though every word a character has said can be very significant later on in the novel. 

Simile for the Camera!

When Alex the parrot comes to Snowman in a dream, it was green then began turning red "as if it's a parrot-shaped light bulb filling up with blood" (p 336) and then suddenly vanished. What did this mean? Why was this significant? Why did Atwood include this in the story? Was it because Snowman was in the presence of the dead bodies of both Crake and Oryx, which was messing with his brain? Was this some guilt about killing Crake that was shown through a bad dream? Was Snowman associated the blood on his hands from killing his best friend, with something from his childhood? Does this relate back to his mother and how she died ON TV without him saying anything about it?

When Snowman first had to take care of the Craker Children he thought that "these people were like blank pages" (p 349), meaning that to him, they were some sort of fresh start. Snowman was able to change his name, and completely alter the outlook on life that the Craker Children would have. But it seems like he isn't necessarily only comparing the Craker Children to a blank page... he's comparing his life to a blank page. No more humans (that he knows about) to deal with, no more working for Crake, no more Crake, no more Oryx, no more old life. This double comparison adds a lot of complexity to the plot since Jimmy saw this as a new opportunity for himself rather than for the Children.

Hardcore Metaphor
When the JUVE virus broke out in Fiji, Jimmy was reminded of the time when Crake said "Change can be accommodated by any system depending on its rate. [...] Touch your head to a wall, nothing happens, but if the same head hits the same wall at ninety miles an hour, it's red paint." (p 341). The metaphor of blood being red paint really shows how little Crake cares about death. He doesn't seem to have much compassion at all and that is especially shown through the use of this metaphor. Atwood used this specific metaphor to demonstrate the type of character Crake really is, and this dark side to him foreshadows what will happen in the future.

This novel was really well-written, however I wish that the ending was not so abrupt and actually gave more information. Other than that, this was a fantastic book with many deep aspects that go beyond the plot. 

One Story Shown in Every Possible Way

This section of Oryx and Crake involved the events of the past beginning to unravel while Snowman explains the story excruciatingly slowly, but with allure. There is so much suspense and foreshadowing used in this novel that I feel as if I am forever angry with this novel, while also being in love with it.


When Crake starts telling Jimmy about how his dad had died on page 182 I had a very strange feeling. Talking about how his dad "fell off" the overpass, but Crake wouldn't flat out say if he accidentally fell or was pushed. Afterwards...

"How could I have missed it? Snowman thinks. What he was telling me. How could I have been so stupid?"(pg. 184)

What did Crake tell Jimmy that he felt was so obvious and how could he not have noticed sooner? Following this, page 211 is completely filled with suspense since Crake will not give Jimmy a straight answer to any questions he has. At the end of this page and onto the next, the events that occurred at the end of Crake's father's life are revealed. 

Atwood utilizes suspense and foreshadowing as devices to maintain the interest of the reader, and to really make the truth being exposed seem like a weight off not only the character's chests, but the reader's chest as well. If Atwood allowed Crake to simply explain what really happened on page 182, there wouldn't have been any suspense involved. 

On page 205, Crake is giving Jimmy a tour of the Watson-Crick institute and shows him the "peculiar bioforms" such as the ChickieNobs and the wolvogs. In Jimmy's mind...

"Why is it he feels some line has been crossed, some boundary transgressed? How much is too much, how far is too far?"(pg. 206)

This seems like the foreshadowing to an event when "too much" and "too far" are reached, resulting in perhaps the downfall of the human race. Atwood includes this element of foreshadowing to allow the reader to link the past of when Jimmy first saw wolvogs at the institute to the present where wolvogs are a rapidly-spreading danger in Snowman's environment. It adds a layer of suspense since the reader is now wondering... how did the wolvogs get out?

Earlier on in the novel, Snowman is thinking about his past relationship with a girl named Morgana, he thinks:

"My love is like a blue, blue rose. Moon on, harvest shine."(pg. 168)

This simile is utilized to express the difficulties with maintaining relationships in Snowman's past life. Jimmy had many girlfriends over the course of his post-secondary career, but didn't end up sticking with just one girl. His mind was set on Oryx. Jimmy also lost his mother, which shows how much difficulty Jimmy had with sustaining relationships. 

Not only was this a simile, "Moon on, harvest shine" is also an allusion to a popular early 1900s song called "Shine On, Harvest Moon", which refers to the lack of love in someone's life. I've included a recording of the song so you can get a feel for what Snowman was referencing. 

Atwood also employs references to pop culture throughout her work such as "Where's my Bride of Frankenstein?"(pg. 169) shortly after the Shine On, Harvest Moon reference. "The Taj Mahal, the Louvre, the Pyramids, the Empire State Building"(pg. 222) are places Snowman knows will end up crumbling down in the near future. The use of these references to pop culture allows the readers to stay connected with the novel due to the familiarity of these people or places. Since this novel is obviously set in the future, the inclusion of these references keeps the novel feeling more current, while also having a futuristic plot. 

There were not as many elements of this section that could be analyzed with a feminist lens as there were in the last section. However, when Jimmy was describing Amanda in the first chapter of her presence, there were notable components of his descriptions that could be analyzed with a feminist lens.  

"She had a very fine ass too, and the tits were real, but - and he'd noticed this early - she was a little flinty around the eyes."(pg. 244)

Amanda seems like an object solely for the male gaze. The fact that her eyes are stern in Jimmy's opinion is a negative factor of Amanda, simply because she doesn't look the way he desires. On top of this, before Jimmy gets into any details about Amanda's past, he feels the need to mention certain physical components of her body that are considered sexual. No wonder she broke up with him 3 pages after he made this description. 

The idea of men treating women as objects

The whole concept of Crake being some powerful supernatural individual in present day, while being untouchable and unreachable by his followers (his children) is a representation of allegory. In this novel the surface of the story, being the plot and characters, is only one way of interpreting the text. Below the surface of the text, there is a symbolic interpretation of the text involving the idea of religion. 

Crake is the God of this new world, and his followers want to see him and speak with him, but they never can. This reminded me of many religions we have in present day, since there is a worshipping aspect to both concepts, where adoration is also heavily involved. There is one quotation that really stood out to me that expressed this religious allegory. 

"It's one of their favourite ideas, going to see Crake."(pg. 160)

Atwood is portraying Crake as the God that individuals are excited to see, even though they can't actually see him. 

The Craker Children, old and young, come together to worship Crake as their God

I was definitely passionate about this section of the novel, and I hope that the final section is just as thrilling, suspenseful, and overwhelming as this one was. 

Two Sides

In the novel, Oryx and Crake, it describes a futuristic world where a disaster occurs that wipes out the human race, except for one individual. This individual is the main character, named Snowman.  In the beginning of the novel, Snowman wakes up and sees that the ocean near him is overflowing with rusted car parts, which gives me the impression that a once high-technology world has now collapsed into nature. This seems ironic to me, because thats how the world used to be before it became humanized by our species, it was just nature.

In the Flotsam subchapter of chapter 1, children that seem better adapted to life than Snowman are introduced as present characters. I thought Snowman was the only remaining human, but then I realized that these children AREN'T human.

“[H]ugging his shins and sucking on his mango, in under the shade of the trees because of the punishing sun. For the children – thick-skinned, resistant to ultraviolet – he’s a creature of dimness, of the dusk.” (page 6)

This quotation includes a lot of information about the present characters, since it clearly hints at how the children are of a new kind, and I find it paradoxical how Snowman is considered as the "creature". 

As the novel progresses, the individual Snowman used to be, Jimmy, is introduced. The novel is then told in two ways, from two sides of the same person. The before side, and the after side. Jimmy tells the story of what was happening before the disaster arose that overwhelmed mankind. Snowman tells the story of how he is surviving as, what he believes to be, the only human left on the planet. I can relate to this since sometimes I view my past self as a different person, and feel as if it was a completely different being who performed my actions in the past.

Snowman doesn't let his past self define his future, especially since it seems as though he identifies as a completely different person.



In this novel I notice a considerable amount of material that falls under the categories of psychoanalytic and feminist lenses.

In terms of Snowman, he has a very apparent id shown throughout the novel. Snowman's id is the idea of Oryx. Oryx brings out the anger in Snowman whilst also calming him down, and repressing his anger. Oryx represents Snowman's sexual desires ranging from when he was a teenager up to present time in the novel. The oediupus complex is also manifested in this novel, since Jimmy has a huge focus of gaining his mother's attention opposed to his father's attention. When his mother leaves, Jimmy becomes very upset and "mourned for weeks. No, for months" (page 61) about his loss.

Looking through a feminist lens, I noticed that Jimmy's dad seems to believe that Jimmy's mother, Sharon, is suffering from hysteria. He thinks that only women suffer from this kind of derangement, and these emotions are never, and should never be displayed by men.

“Women and what went on under their collars. Hotness and coldness, coming and going in the strange musky flowery variable-weather country inside their clothes – mysterious, important, uncontrollable. That was his father’s take on things." (page 17)

I disagree with his father's point of view, since in my opinion just because a woman has issues with mental health, and doesn't want any form of treatment, that doesn't make her crazy or dumb. When Ramona finds out Sharon refused treatment, she responds by saying "It's such a shame, a waste. I mean she was so smart!" (page 25) instead of considering that the decision belongs to Jimmy's mother. 

In conclusion, I think that Oryx and Crake is so far a great novel, and I am ready to be thrilled once again by the chapters to come. 

The End of a Journey

I have now finished The Namesake by Jhumpa Lahiri! Right off the bat I must say that I got so into the book after the first 4 chapters. I was rooting for characters, I was hoping for things to happen, and I was genuinely excited to read every single page.

Would I read this book again in the future? Maybe, but probably not. I have generated such detest for some characters in this book that I really don't think I can go through reading it again. I also don't think I would read it again because of how painfully slow the beginning of the novel was. In comparison, I wouldn't read the third Hunger Games book, Mockingjay, again because of how SLOW it was in my opinion. So in other words, Gogol's journey in this novel is finished, and my journey reading this novel is also finished.


Let's dive head first right in to my opinions shall we? Since I was so interested in this novel, I have many opinions about the events. Prepare for a very long post!



1. Moushumi 

Moushumi in a nutshell

The relationship between Gogol and Moushumi started off so adorable! Meeting up after so many years of being apart. It gave me such a girl-next-door type of vibe, and I really wanted them to stay together. ALTHOUGH, I must say, I really did enjoy the relationship between Gogol and Maxine more than the relationship between Gogol and Moushumi, but I still found Goshumi to be such a great couple. BUT, I'm not kidding when I say that when Moushumi began thinking about this "Dimitri" shmuck, on page 256, I KNEW something bad was going to happen.

"The name alone, when she'd first learned it, had been enough to seduce her. Dimitri Desjardins." (Lahiri. 256)

When I continued reading about Moushumi's fantasies involving Dimitri, I finally reached page 263. I wanted to phone Gogol and warn him of the upcoming events involving his relationship the second I read this...

"She dials the number, listens as it rings four times. She wonders if he'll even remember her. Her heart races. Her finger moves to the cradle, ready to press down. "Hello?" It's his voice. "Hi, Dimitri?" "Speaking. Who's this?" She pauses. She can still hang up if she wants. "It's Mouse." They begin seeing each other [...]" (Lahiri. 263)

I have so many issues with this, so why don't I just list them off? 

a) The novel says, "She can still hang up if she wants", but guess what she doesn't do? SHE DOESN'T HANG UP THE PHONE. Which means that she didn't want to hang up. She wanted to talk to this guy. 

b) Doesn't she remember what a "vow" means? The literal definition of "vow" is "a solemn promise". She broke a promise, she broke morals, and in the end, she broke someone's heart. Shame on her. 

c) My third issue is that on the EXACT SAME PAGE that she calls Dimitri for the first time in years (263) they are already having sex. In this novel, you can tell that this sex doesn't mean much, since Lahiri normally refers to sex as "making love". However, in this context, it is just referred to as "sex". Sex as a word has no sensual meaning, it doesn't have as much value to the act as "making love" does. 

Overall, Moushumi made me want to punch a brick wall with my bare fist because of how disloyal she is to someone who is doing anything to give her everything he possibly can. 

2. Fun talk about names!!!

"Moushumi argues that a name like hers is a curse, complains that no one can say it properly, that the kids at school pronounced it Moosoomi and shortened it to Moose. "I hated being the only Moushumi I knew," she says. "See now, I'd have loved that," Oliver tells her." (Lahiri. 239)

In my case, I would love to have a unique name. I think a lot of people really enjoy having a unique name, because it makes them stand out, and makes people remember them. For example, Bruno Mars's real name is Peter Hernandez. How many people with the classic name Peter do you know, versus the amount of people with the name Bruno Mars? Would you remember the name Bruno Mars easier, or Peter Hernandez easier?

Standing out for being unique

However, at the same time I guess this could be an example of how the grass is greener on the other side of the fence. If my name wasn't Amanda, and was instead something like Lollipop, I would feel absurd and out of place. Perhaps people with unique names can tend to feel out of place, or abnormal. It all comes down to personal preference. 

I also really loved how Gogol FINALLY spoke up at one of these repetitive dinner parties, and said what he was truly thinking. 

"Theres no such thing as a perfect name. I think that human beings should be allowed to name themselves when they turn eighteen," he adds. "Until then, pronouns." People shake their heads dismissively." (Lahiri. 245)

YES GOGOL!!!! Tell them what you think! Who cares if they shake their heads "dismissively"? Gogol had to put up with these dinner parties for so long, listening to conversation he never cared about, and he never had input about topics. Good for you, Gogol. I can't really say I agree with what he said, because I find that naming a child is such a classic custom that takes so much thought and planning, and I find it to be a necessary part of parenthood. But to each his own. 

3. An interesting connection between the narration of the novel, and Gogol's namesake.

"He had slept soundly, curled up on two seats, his book unread, using his overcoat as a blanket, pulled up to his chin." (Lahiri 280)

This made me smile, since it is obviously a connection Lahiri was making between Gogol Ganguli, and Nikolai Gogol. She could have just said that Gogol was using his coat as a blanket, but she decided to say "overcoat". Diction at it's finest! Reading this made me reminisce about the relationship Gogol and his father used to share, and think about how much Gogol misses his father. Very sad, but comforting to remember that Gogol really did care about his father. 

4. I can't help but feel bad for Gogol at moments like this!

"In the spring he went to Venice alone for a week, the trip he'd planned for the two of them, saturating himself in its ancient, melancholy beauty." (Lahiri. 283)

Poor Gogol! He put so much hard work into thinking about, and planning this wonderful trip for him and Moushumi. I was ready to melt when he thought of the gift idea, for them to spend time together in Italy. That sounds so beautiful and romantic. I went to Italy about a year and a half ago, and I really think that Venice would have been a lovely place for Gogol and Moushumi to spend some quality time together. Too bad she's unfaithful!!!! 

5. I also found that the writing style of the novel became much more intimate between the author and the reader after the first third of the book. It felt like the characters were right in front of me, and I was seeing them with my own eyes. The diction that Lahiri was using throughout the last 60% of the book increasingly got more interesting to me, and continued to make me want to read more.

6. Within the final 4 chapters of the novel, I really noticed that there was a recurring theme about love and marriage and how it differs from person to person in the same family. 

Ashoke and Ashima had a love that branched from their pasts in India, and was most definitely a different form of love than any relationship Gogol encountered. The relationships Gogol had can be contrasted with the relationship that Ashima and Ashoke shared. Gogol had a romantic and sexual relationship with three women throughout the story (Ruth, Maxine, and Moushumi), all of which were intense relationships that really influenced the way Gogol acted. In comparison, Ashima and Ashoke were one another's only romantic partner throughout the course of the novel. Their relationship was not as sexual as the relationships Gogol possessed, and this really showed how different love can be between different people. 

Love can mean something different to everyone

This also really highlights the differences between the generations of the Ganguli family. Gogol believed that love was something he had to find on his own, and it had to make him feel something deep within himself. The love between Ashima and Ashoke was not found by them, it was arranged by their parents. In the beginning, the relationship between Ashima and Ashoke didn't make either of them feel any desire for one another deep within themselves. The idea of love in their minds was to create a family, not to be lovestruck for their partner. The idea of love in Gogol's mind was the opposite. 

After reading this novel, I can conclude that the book really wasn't half bad, and I honestly did enjoy reading it. The contrasts between generations, the variety of events that occurred, and the contrasts between cultures in this novel really kept me interested in the story. Great job, Lahiri! Stay updated with my page because I intend on posting content about future novels I'm going to read! 

Works Cited

Digital image. Cool Love Wallpapers Desktop. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Oct. 2016.

Digital image. Moj Enterijer, n.d. Web. 16 Oct. 2016.

Not Half Bad. Digital image. What's The Saying Answers. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Oct. 2016.

Some People Be Perpetrating Like They're an Angel But Ain't Nothing But a Devil in Disguise. Digital image. Jar of Quotes. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Oct. 2016.

Venice Is One of the Best Places to Travel to Alone, According to RoutePerfect.com. Digital image. 11 European Destinations Everyone Should Travel to Alone. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Oct. 2016.

#Vow. Digital image. Topsy, n.d. Web. 16 Oct. 2016.

The Namesake is.... Interesting...

So as you guys know, I am currently reading The Namesake by Jhumpa Lahiri. I have finished 8 chapters out of the 12 in the novel, and I found that chapters 5-8 were WAY different than chapters 1-4. These two sections are polar opposites in comparison to one another. What happened to Gogol/Nikhil/what even is his name anymore? During half the novel the author refers to him as Gogol, but at other times she refers to him as Nikhil. I understand if he is referred to as Gogol while around his family, but it seems at the most random of times his name just gets flip-flopped between the two options.

Polar opposites

Flip-Flop, Flip-Flop.......

Gogol seems to be going through the genital psychosexual stage like nobody I have ever seen before! HOW MANY GIRLS??? HOW MANY GIRLS DO YOU NEED GOGOL?????? He used to be such a sweet little boy who loved his mommy and spent his days with her, and now he's a sex-craving teenager in a grown man's body.

Gogol lives for sex... its part of his cardiograph...

On top of Gogol's love for sex, Lahiri seems to just throw the idea of sex into the novel like its not even important.

"Still, some nights when her parents have a dinner party she has no interest in, or simply to be fair, she appears, quickly filling up the small space with her gardenia perfume, her coat, her big brown leather bag, her discarded clothes, and they make love on his futon as the traffic rumbles below. He is nervous to have her in his place, aware that he has put nothing up on his walls, that he has not bothered to buy lamps to replace the dismal glow of the ceiling light" (Lahiri 139). 

Why is there chit-chat about him having the most intimate physical connection with a girl he loves, and then narration about how he doesn't have paintings or lamps? The story just makes me feel as if sex isn't important, when we live our whole lives thinking its very important! Perhaps sex is a different type of connection in Lahiri's mind, but I really have to disagree with this. Throughout the novel it just seems as if sex is just a small, worthless accessory in any of Gogol's relationships. 

This dinner could've been so much more :(

GOGOL AND MOUSHUMI BURNED A PERFECTLY GOOD DINNER JUST SO THEY COULD BANG. They had their first kiss approximately 0.23 seconds before they had sex. Again, don't we live our lives thinking that these physical intimacy moments are sacred and important? But in this novel it just seems as if a kiss, or having sex is just a simple act between two people who may or may not even care about each other. Another example of this is when Gogol was KNOWINGLY part of the act of infidelity. When he decided to have sex with Bridget, knowing that she has a husband in a different city and that he knew nothing about her, just makes me think he is a sex-driven pig!!! And then after that, he feels guilty when the train passes him on its way to New York from Boston because he thinks that Bridget's loyal husband may be on that train. GOOD! FEEL GUILTY! It's not like Bridget never told Gogol she was in a relationship, Gogol knew. The fact that he made the decision to assist someone in cheating on their husband makes me lose a lot of respect for his character.


Another new event in the novel that caught my attention was the different style of narration as Gogol gets older. The novel never once swore up until page 140. NEVER. ONCE. But then all of a sudden, when a more appropriate word could have been used to better suit the context of the novel, Lahiri slaps us in the face with shit (pun intended).

 Lahiri needs one of these!

"In the mornings a few times a week he gets up early and goes running before work with Gerald along the Hudson, down to Battery Park City and back. He volunteers to take Silas out for walks, holding the leash as the dog sniffs and pokes at trees, and he picks up Silas's warm shit with a plastic bag" (Lahiri 140).

When I read this I distinctly remember just stopping. I stopped reading momentarily. I was shocked. Out of all words in the English language, the author chooses one of the most offensive words to describe what comes out of a dog, when in the previous sentence it mentions how Gogol spends his time with Gerald. WHAT? The language in this novel is by no means formal, but it is most definitely not causal either, or so I thought. The language in this novel instantly became casual in my mind when I read this. Doesn't this book seem like a novel to use the word "feces" or "excrement" instead?

The separation of a family :(

I didn't really find any aspects of the novel I could relate to in the first 4 chapters, however I did find something I relate to in chapter 7. When Ashoke had an unexpected heart attack and died very soon after, that reminded me of something that happened in my family not too long ago. Around the end of August I went camping in Western Ontario, then when I came home my mom told me that her mother had a stroke a day and a half earlier. This shocked me since my grandmother never really had anything physically wrong with her body, which was exceptionally surprising considering the fact that she was in her mid 80s. Now, what really allowed me to connect with the novel is the fact that nobody in the Ganguli family could help Ashoke since he was far away from the rest of his family. My grandmother had always lived in Victoria, which is the very far Western part of Canada. We couldn't do anything to help or save her, and the event ended the same way it did for Ashoke. Sometimes life happens and it sucks, but there's nothing you, or anyone else can do about it. 


Overall, my opinion on this novel has most definitely changed from chapters 1-4, and I believe that the book is more interesting than before, however I still don't overly like it due to some previously mentioned reasons. A concept I enjoy about The Namesake is how true and relatable it can be to so many people of many diverse cultures. I wish the novel would include more information on Sonia just to see if she is as different/separate from the classic Bengali culture as Gogol is. All that was mentioned is that she moved to California. Is she in any relationships? Are her relationships with other Bengali men? What does she get involved with in California? What is she studying? How often does she come home? I understand that Gogol is the main character of the story, but the novel really did only seem to focus on the male characters of the book.... Ashoke and Gogol.... Ashima's grandfather.... when Ashima's mother died there was hardly anything said about it! Now, I'm not here to accuse the author, but I believe that this novel could include more details about the female characters so then readers, such as myself, don't believe it is a novel that is an example of feminist criticism! Honestly though, I am truly excited to continue reading this novel and to see where it heads! Leave your opinions down below, and thanks for reading :)

Works Cited

Abstract Heart Beats Cardiogram Illustration Sign Sex Written with Glowing Letters. Digital image. Illustration. N.p., n.d. Web. 8 Oct. 2016.

Burned Dinner Related Keywords. Digital image. Burned Dinner. N.p., n.d. Web. 7 Oct. 2016.

Digital image. Funny Swear Jar. N.p., n.d. Web. 8 Oct. 2016.

Havaianas Flip Flops 4 555px.png. Digital image. Havaianas Flip Flops 4 SVG. N.p., n.d. Web. 7 Oct. 2016.

I Blew Up At My Wife And Now I'm Separated. Digital image. Marriage. N.p., n.d. Web. 8 Oct. 2016.

Polar Opposites. Digital image. Polar Opposites T-Shirt. N.p., n.d. Web. 8 Oct. 2016.