jhumpalahiri.jpg

Tepid Orchestration


Unaccustomed Earth by Jhumpa Lahiri / Donna Sherman

Book Reviews | August 19, 2008 | Comments (18)


All right, let me just say upfront that I haven’t read any of Jhumpa Lahiri’s other works. And, judging by some cursory research, I’m one of the few who were totally unaware of her existence prior to this review. So it is with no preconceived notions about the virtuosity of her writing and her grand place at the forefront of modern literature that I say: this book bored me to nothing. It bored the nothing out of me. There was no shit, no tears — phrases too strong to really describe the utter apathy I felt after reading Unaccustomed Earth.

Sorry for harping on that point, but it’s hard to write a review when a book so drains you that you don’t really feel like moving, let alone writing. Say what you will about Nicholas Sparks, but two pages of The Notebook were enough to get me to write a fucking dissertation on the many ways in which he sucks shit hunks. Alternatively, I could write pages singing the praises of Kurt Vonnegut. My reaction to Lahiri, however, was a resounding meh.

Of course, having thoroughly not enjoyed the book, I would love to go off on a scathingly bitchy rant about how awful it was, but I’m denied even that pleasure by this most boring and energy sapping of tomes. Or, to put it another way, there’s no real pitiful lack of talent or infuriating inflation of ego on display here, so a full-on attack feels uncalled for.

Unaccustomed Earth is a collection of eight contemplative short stories with melancholy endings. The first five are unrelated, and the closing three form a trilogy of related short stories featuring the characters Hema and Kaushik. Each story is written competently, in clear, elegant prose. Each character is presented as a subtle and complex human being with conflicting but relatable emotions. Meals are described in exquisite detail. And then nothing happens.

The book’s jacket gives the following summary:

In the title story, Ruma, a young mother in a new city, is visited by her father, who carefully tends the earth of her garden, where he and his grandson form a special bond. But he is harbouring a secret from his daughter, a love affair he’s keeping all to himself. In “A Choice of Accommodations,” a couple’s romantic getaway weekend takes a dark turn at a party that lasts deep into the night. In “Only Goodness,” a sister eager to give her younger brother the perfect childhood she never had, is overwhelmed by guilt, anguish, and anger when his alcoholism threatens her family. And in “Hema and Kaushik,” a trio of linked stories - an intensely compelling elegy of life and death, love and fate - we follow the lives of a girl and a boy who, one fateful winter, share a house in suburban Massachusetts. They travel from innocence to experience on separate, sometimes painful paths, until destiny brings them together again years later in Rome.

You can take it that everyone, their parents, and their gold fish has a PhD or masters from MIT, Harvard, Princeton, Penn, or Swarthmore (and if they don’t, they’re an unredeemable alcoholic loser). If I learned one thing about the immigration experience from the narrow scope of Unaccustomed Earth, it’s that they give PhDs away on arrival at the airport, a nugget of information I feel will serve me quite well in the near future.

Lahiri’s style, while similar to Hemingway in its unadorned simplicity, seems also cold and clinical, which allows for some interesting character study, but distances the reader. I dreaded the end of each story not because I was enjoying it so very much, but because I didn’t want to have to expend the energy required to get into another one. It wasn’t worth it — there was no payoff or reward for spending time with these characters, not even in the simplest or subtlest of ways.

It might be helpful to compare this to another book I just finished - Jim the Boy, by Tony Earley. It too takes meaning from glimpses into the smaller moments of people’s lives and approaches realism by not supplying any stories with complete and final endings, but there was a certain charm, grace, warmth, or even humanity, to his writing that gave it a purpose — all things I thought were lacking in Unaccustomed Earth.

Why did these stories need to be told? What justifies the use of the paper they’re printed on? I’m not entirely sure even Lahiri knows the answer. It’s like the book was written because words were needed on the publisher’s desk by Tuesday, not because Lahiri actually had anything new to say.

The only exception to this, I found, was the short-story “Hell-Heaven,” which ended with a beautifully understated acknowledgment of mother-daughter bonding which gave the story a purpose and direction.

People have called Lahiri’s intricate descriptions both a grocery list of Indian food and closely observed, minutely detailed literature. I don’t see the latter. Description is all very well when setting a scene or trying to entice a reader into a newly imagined universe, but I certainly don’t see any grand metaphor behind pullao and lamb curry. And don’t you try to tell me that the food is a metaphor for thought, despair, inspiration, loneliness or what have you because: bullshit.

All narrators, first and third person, male and female, sound exactly the same. They’re all privileged, educated, first -or second- generation Bengali immigrants adjusting to life in America. They care about and describe the same things in the same words, and I don’t actually care whether this was meant to convey the shared struggle of immigration and the ultimate unity of our plight as human beings or whatever a Pulitzer Prize-winning author has to put in a book in order to keep up appearances. It just felt unimaginative.

In hindsight, however, the biggest problem I had with Unaccustomed Earth is its almost total lack of humor. “Comedy and tragedy step through life together,” said Sean O’Casey, and the best of literature reflects this. But with Lahiri it’s all subtle tragedy. Sometimes misery can be valuable as a depth of feeling that substantiates life, but Lahiri’s work is so restrained and detached that the tragedy doesn’t feel deep, it just feels pointless.

After reading Unaccustomed Earth, I did a little research on Lahiri and was not at all surprised to find that she was a London-born, American-raised, Ivy-league educated woman of Bengali origin. Clearly, she lives and worships by the “write what you know” doctrine. This could have been an interesting opportunity for her to describe contrasting reactions to similar circumstances, but instead, the same theme was explored ad infinitum in each tale. The collection reminded me of nothing so much as “Bolero” by Maurice Ravel, who has been quoted as saying about the theme of his piece: “I’m going to try and repeat it a number of times without any development, gradually increasing the orchestra as best I can.” Lahiri doesn’t even increase the orchestra.

Donna Sherman works in a bookstore, and is now writing book reviews. She predicts she has two more months before she gives up on English and begins speaking in tongues, and she can’t summarize to save her life. Contact her at dropoffmymail@gmail.com.









DVD Releases | The Office Season Two













Comments

So she writes what she knows, but what she knows is a very narrow little slice of banality.

Hmm. Guess I'll be skipping this, and heading straight to the airport to pick up a PhD. I always wondered where those came from.

Posted by: Wednesday at August 28, 2008 12:51 PM

Damn, that's a shame, I really loved The Namesake and Interpreter of Maladies.

Posted by: Julie at August 28, 2008 12:53 PM

Finally!!! I can't believe you guys got around to reviewing Lahiri's work, she's perhaps one of the best authors of modern literature today. To the untrained mind she can seem dry, but if you take the time to understand her written words, I'm sure you'll be blown away by her work. Bravo!! Pajiba.

Posted by: Pookie at August 28, 2008 1:14 PM

Reminds me a bit of my feelings towards Naguib Mahfouz's Sugar Street. It wasn't bad and it wasn't that I disliked it to any great degree, but I just felt like I was going through the motions of reading and when it was all over I felt nothing different from when I'd started.

I have been through several international airports in the US and Europe and have yet to get a Ph.D. I wonder what I'm doing wrong.

Posted by: Genny (also Rusty) at August 28, 2008 1:16 PM

i'm not often motivated to respond negatively to articles on pajiba, but this review is dogshit. it reminds of a high schooler who just finished a classic, and who's only reaction is "meh. there were no explosions. i was bored." unaccustomed earth is at least as brilliant, if not more so, than interpreter of maladies - and that won the pulitzer. lahiri may focus on characters with a similar background to her own, but she is incredibly good at linking those experiences to universal human emotions. the reviewer missed this one badly, and seems completely comfortable reveling in that fact.

Posted by: butters at August 28, 2008 1:23 PM

The review doesn't surprise me. After I read The Namesake, I felt depressed and tired. Frankly, she goes on forever describing anything, which can be good when done to an extent. But like you said, she can go on and on talking about a houseplant and the many meanings it has. Eventually, it stops being meaningful and just gets wordy and you want to get to the next part.

Posted by: Brie at August 28, 2008 1:46 PM

Awards and fabricated emotions don't make a book good. Explosions aren't required either. This review seems to me like it was written by a normal person who simply didn't enjoy a abook because it didn't catch her attention, not because of a lack of explosion, but because of a lack realism and meaningful sotry. The fact that you chose to put the time and effort into finding menaing there was none shows that you are not the average reader, but someone who chooses to look for such things, and there is nothing wrong with that, that does not, however, give you the justification to refer to someone's opinion of a book she didn't like as dogshit. I find your arrogance disgusting and I will tkae the equally arrogant step of declaring your review of this review (yes yours butters) dogshit.

Posted by: antibutters at August 28, 2008 1:49 PM

I don't know what Donna had really expected of Jhumpa Lahiri's work. She should have done her research before, and not after, subjecting herself to this "bullshit." Obviously, Jhumpa Lahiri's universe is not a very wide one; she knows only her own kind. But that is actually quite typical of most first- or second-generation immigrant communities in the US. They tend to hang out only with their own kind. I go to a school with a large international student body, and I see these things all the time (full disclosure: I am a Bengali male from Bangladesh, and I came to the US in 2004 for, you guessed it, my MA; and now I'm doing PhD in anthropology). I made it a point when I came to this country not to mix and mingle only with my own people. It appears that not many immigrants, including Ms Lahiri, either do not make that point, or they simply do not care about what goes on on the other side of the cultural boundary (although this feeling may be mutual in both the host and the migrant communities). As a result, they keep churning out the same cliches about the problems and struggles for integration among the immigrant communities.

Posted by: Emran at August 28, 2008 2:26 PM

Emran, in fairness, most people don't do research about the book before they read it, they sit down and read. The research was done after for the sake of teh review, but the review is done to see whether it's enjoyable. As for the book itself, she didn't call it bullshit, she called it boring. She referred to a particular thought process of finding symbolism in food as bullshit in her mind (presumably meaning that the symbolism either isn't there or is flimsy at best). That said, you do make a good point about immigrants and the mixing of culture. Well said.

Posted by: antibutters at August 28, 2008 3:00 PM

Antibutters, Jhumpa Lahiri is a Pulitzer-winning, best-selling, "celebrity" author; and Donna works at a bookstore (which, I believe, subscribes to the major publishing industry/literary newsletters). Wouldn't you expect her to know at least about the general background and tendencies of Jhumpa Lahiri herself and of her work? Having said that, I've read only the first book of Jhumpa Lahiri, and I kind of guessed what was going to come in the future. She has found a relatively fool-proof formula of producing "excellent" and "profound" works, and there is no apparent reason why she should be abandoning that strategy.

Posted by: Erman at August 28, 2008 3:45 PM

Donna- I would LOVE to read pages and pages of your singing the praises of Vonnegut....

Posted by: nancy at August 28, 2008 5:58 PM

Reading rots your brain. Crack open a good TV and let your imagination soar.

Posted by: Lucas at August 28, 2008 7:34 PM

I hate that I generally have nothing to say for the Pajiba book reviews. It isn't because I'm not a reader (although I've done nothing to earn that appellation recently); it's just that the last couple of years of midlife career transition (three jobs and hoping to move into a more stable fourth) have left precious little time to read things that aren't soul-crushingly techno-industrial...or Pajiba.

I launched into this review expecting the same outcome -- I haven't read any of Lahiri's work, nor do I expect to be able to in the foreseeable future. However, some points were raised that were sufficient to draw me out of my literary shell.

Reading the review and the ensuing comments left me thinking of two other non-native English speaker / Anglo immigrant authors, Salman Rushdie and Joseph Conrad. I have a similar reaction to Rushdie that Donna describes having to Lahiri, so in at least one sense I think I "get" that part of her review. Then I read the defenses of Lahiri and I thought about Conrad, mentally calling "bullshit" the whole way about the authorially limiting factors of the immigrant experience.

I rather suspect I wouldn't enjoy reading Lahiri, but that doesn't mean I would pass up the chance whenever it might present itself. I found enough consideration and insight in Donna's review to feel a sense of shared understanding (that still awaits validation), and that's all I look for in a review. So thank you for that.

Posted by: Che Grovera at August 29, 2008 9:12 AM

Finally- someone who reflects exactly my ( and I suspect there are several others) sentiments about her writing.

Posted by: Mahan Rammaddin at August 30, 2008 10:04 AM

I just want to clarify, in case there was any confusion - I was not belittling the amount of hard work, time, and effort that goes into getting a PhD. In a way, I felt like Lahiri was, given that EVERYONE in EVERY story had one from a prestigious university. There were six separate storylines, each filled with full casts of characters, and they were all doctors of some type. I found it ridiculous, and that's what my airport comment was referring to. SO please don't be offended on that account.

If you're offended because I clearly don't understand the brilliance of Lahiri's work - well, sorry. It's a book review, and that's how I felt after reading this book. I don't claim any authority on the matter, it's simply an opinion.

Erman, I'm a university student who works at a textbook store in the summer, so if there are any catalogs, I haven't seen them. I tried to tell you exactly where I was coming from when I read the book - that I haven't read any of her previous works - so that you could judge for yourself how to respond the review.

Butters, I'm sorry you feel that way. I don't recall saying that this is a terrible book which should be universally despised - Pulitzer prize winning author or not, I didn't enjoy the book, and I wrote the review. I'm actually not the slightest bit interesting in explosions if they aren't pertinent to the plot of a novel. Disagree with the review all you want - I love a good discussion about a book, and even if I didn't, it's a free country and all that - but please don't attack me personally.

Posted by: dsbs at August 31, 2008 2:12 AM

The way the go on praising this book in India, you'd think that critics have totally lost it. I'm definitely not reading her again!

Posted by: Diviya at September 1, 2008 7:02 AM

I totally agree with Donna Sherman-the book really has nothing much to say with the exception of one story-Hell heaven. All the other stories are strictly so-so and I dont get it why people are praising this book as there is nothing else to salvage the stories.
I am for one very dejected as I had expected Jhumpa to write a collection as good as her other book-The Interpretor of maladies.

Well written,Donna.

Posted by: B at October 26, 2008 10:30 AM

It's interesting to see so many comments following your review of Lahiri's work. Certainly, your review says a lot, but there are readers who can relate to Lahiri's description of stories, even if they weren't Ph.Ds! What's more, it certainly takes painstaking effort to describe minute details about emotions, feelings and events - most of us might consider this a waste of time and our minds. But, I guess, the depth of her writing resides in a layer beneath those minutae and in those untold and incomplete conclusions of her stories. After all, this book is entitled "Unaccustomed Earth", don't you think it would be absurd to look for a conclusion to the little portions of "Earth" she potrays in each of her stories??

Posted by: Shini at November 10, 2008 2:54 AM


















Viral Hits

>> Pajiba Movie Posters

>> Pop Culture's 20 Greatest Dancing GIFs

>> Mindhole Blowers

>> The 100 Greatest Insults of All Time

>> The "Other" 100 Greatest Movie Quotes

>> The 100 Greatest Movie Threats of All Time

>> The Sean Bean Death Reel

>> Chicks Dig Beards: It's Science

>> The Coolest TV Show Title Sequences

>> The Most Rewatchable Movies

>> The Most Expensive Movies of All Time