After reading the book, I found myself with mixed feelings. Unfortunately, I am not really into romantic love triangle stories and so I disliked the fact that Bimala's emotions were the center of the actual storyline. That is my opinion, but I do respect how different and groundbreaking it must have been when this story was first published. In that sense it was ahead of it's time because it presented a woman with an opportunity to expand into the world for the first time in her life which was pretty much unheard of back then.
Additionally, I found it very interesting that Tagore had such an open mind about the whole Swadeshi Movement. As evidenced by the arguments between Nikhil and Sandip throughout the novel, it would appear that at the time a person picked a side and maintained a closed mind about it. As the two characters had political debates, not once did one actually hear out what the other was saying. As a reader I could understand that they were both right for different reasons and were frustrated that they were so unable to see it that way. The fact that the author was able to write from both perspectives must've meant that he considered both perspectives.
Today it is debated whether or not the Swadeshi Movement was productive or damaging to India as a whole, seeing that the Muslims and the Hindus were divided into two nations. It seemed as if Tagore was writing about this occurrence decades before it took place. Whether or not I enjoyed the story, the man was brilliant.
It does seem as if Tagore had a unique view of the events and he does a good job of explaining both sides of the movement. However I feel that Bimala's emotions are a key part of the book more for the other characters than herself. While we learn about Bimala's feelings we also see how Sandip and Nikhil affect her and how they shape her decisions throughout the book. Without these emotional scenes I feel that the other characters would suffer and their meaning would not have been as strong.
ReplyDeleteI agree and now see how he was trying to do that. Admittedly, I was a little bit disappointed with the story line which made me somewhat ignorant to the bigger picture. After class discussions and reading other blog posts I more clearly understand what Bimala represented. Thank you for commenting.
ReplyDeleteI will admit that I am a huge fan of what you called "romantic love triangle stories". However, I thought the plot of this novel was a little different than the average love story. I'm used to the Jane Austin-style love triangle. In Austin's Pride and Prejudice, the woman is attracted to the "bad guy" and detests the "good guy". Then, she realizes the bad guy is actually bad and the good guy is actually good and she and the "good guy" live happily ever after. I realize that this is a poor description of an excellent romance novel so I will provide a link to a much better summary. A lot of modern romance stories, specifically romantic-comedy films in the United States, are based off of this classic theme. In contrast, in The Home and the World, Bimala is already with the man we consider the "good guy" before she becomes attracted to the "bad guy". It's a unique circumstance, and an accurate depiction of a real-life love triangle that probably occurs more often than Austin' style of love triangles.
ReplyDeletePride and Prejudice summary:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pride_and_Prejudice