As I was reading Rushdie's recollection of Bombay, I was intrigued by the images he used to re-create his homeland in his mind. He remembers his Bombay as "the vividness of the red tiles, the yellow-edged green of cactus leaves, the brilliance of bougainvillea creeper" (9). The reason I say his Bombay is because this was the authors own perception of his homeland. These are the details he remembers and uses to reconstruct Bombay in his mind. Although tiles and plants may seem insignificant to others who are not from his homeland, to him they hold a significantly deeper meaning.
As a reader, the objects that Rushdie listed did not stir any emotions. This is because they do not describe my own past. I am from a different time and place, and I will never understand the connection that Rushdie feels towards Bombay. I will never have the same memories or images engrained in my mind. However, I was tempted to pause and reflect on images from my own past. I was surprised to find that my memories were of specific foods, clothes, and toys. Although these items hold significance in my mind, to someone from a different past they would be meaningless. Therefor, as a reader I can use images of my own past to understand the connection between Rushdie and the objects of his past.
In the very beginning of Home and the World, Bimala says to her deceased mother, "today there comes back to mind the vermillion mark at the parting of your hair, the sari which you used to wear, with its wide red boarder, and those wonderful eyes of yours, full of depth and peace" (17). She remembers her mother by small, fragmented details. These details do nothing to evoke memories of my own mother, much like Rushdie's description of his homeland did not remind me of my own homeland. However, when I think of the images that do remind me of my mother, I can better understand the emotion that Bimala is feeling. Rushdie and Bimala both use imagery to recall moments of their past. As a reader, I feel the same emotions in my own life, I just use different images to re-live these emotions. I can't help but wonder, why is it that we associate such strong emotions with small details of our lives?
As a reader, the objects that Rushdie listed did not stir any emotions. This is because they do not describe my own past. I am from a different time and place, and I will never understand the connection that Rushdie feels towards Bombay. I will never have the same memories or images engrained in my mind. However, I was tempted to pause and reflect on images from my own past. I was surprised to find that my memories were of specific foods, clothes, and toys. Although these items hold significance in my mind, to someone from a different past they would be meaningless. Therefor, as a reader I can use images of my own past to understand the connection between Rushdie and the objects of his past.
In the very beginning of Home and the World, Bimala says to her deceased mother, "today there comes back to mind the vermillion mark at the parting of your hair, the sari which you used to wear, with its wide red boarder, and those wonderful eyes of yours, full of depth and peace" (17). She remembers her mother by small, fragmented details. These details do nothing to evoke memories of my own mother, much like Rushdie's description of his homeland did not remind me of my own homeland. However, when I think of the images that do remind me of my mother, I can better understand the emotion that Bimala is feeling. Rushdie and Bimala both use imagery to recall moments of their past. As a reader, I feel the same emotions in my own life, I just use different images to re-live these emotions. I can't help but wonder, why is it that we associate such strong emotions with small details of our lives?
Although I agree that descriptions of someone else's past experiences will never cause me to feel the same emotions I feel when imagining my past experiences, I believe some emotions can be stirred by someone else's descriptions of his or her past. Perhaps different people react to differing degrees to other's retellings of their pasts, but I seem to naturally react at times to those retellings. I do not always have to remember my own past in order to feel emotion. I believe this is because what people tend to remember from their past tends to be similar among people. We all have early memories of family members like our mothers and other memories of objects in our homes like plants. Although a writer's description of a plant he or she remembers or his or her mother's characteristics may differ somewhat from those of our own past, certain aspects will differ little. Because of this, I believe we can, at times, almost feel like a writer is describing our own past when he or she is actually describing his or her own past.
ReplyDeletei completely agree with your comment, and I think one of the most beautiful qualities of humans is that we can feel for others based on our own experiences, even if the details of our pasts differ a little.
ReplyDeleteWould anyone be willing to create/share their own list of mini-memories, using Rushdie's example (the vividness of the red tiles, the yellow-edged green of cactus leaves, the brilliance of bougainvillea creeper" (9) ), that remind them of home?