LITERATURE: The Namesake – Timeline, POV, Tense,Title

Feels so good to be getting through a book more than a page or two at a time. Here I am at the end of Chapter 5 and I’ve noticed a few more things.

The point of view is obviously third person, omniscient, as we shift focus from the original main characters of Ashima and Ashoke to their son, Gogol (a.k.a. Nikhil–more on this in a bit). Lahiri includes the date, or year, below each chapter number, thus dividing the story into sections that actually span a few years, allowing Gogol to grow up, struggle for his identity, move in a direction that weaves in the history of his name even as he spurns it.

Something interesting about the way the novel is set up, with the narrative guided so strictly by timeline, is that the book is entirely in present tense. Present tense is difficult to employ throughout a story the length of a novel. It is used most often in the crime fiction genre where it is best used to keep up the tension. Present tense in truth becomes past the moment after it is read, however, and to use it within the structure of this novel and to do it credibly and well, is a tribute to Jhumpa Lahiri as an author.

At the end of the previous chapter, Gogol is coming home for Thanksgiving on a break from college when the train he is on is halted for many hours following a suicide on the tracks. When his father picks him up at the station, he is obviously a bit worried. Ashoke then tells Gogol the real reason he has been named after the Russian author, and tells him the details of that horrible night when he was seriously injured in a train wreck. Gogol is dumbstruck, learning so much more about his father than he’d never thought to ask, and gaining a new respect of sorts for the name.

When he started college, Gogol officially changed his name to Nikhil, leaving only those in his past, his family and his friends in Massachusetts referring to him as Gogol. What struck me at this point of the story is that we, the reader, are part of that past association. The character is still being referred to as Gogol to us. It’s an interesting point, and yet one where much of the fine points of writing are at play. The author must encourage an empathy for his main characters. To switch names on us now would be risky. We, more fortunate than even Gogol’s parents, are privileged to still know him by his pet name.

This entry was posted in LITERATURE and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.