Order of the Chapters
I think that Shamsie gave each section of her novel a different character's perspective because she was trying to demonstrate that only looking at one person's viewpoint does not always tell the full story. It highlights the importance of listening to all sides of a story instead of just listening to what one person thinks. For example, in Isma's section, Isma depicts Parvaiz as being this extremely selfish terrorist, but once we get to Parvaiz's perspective in his chapters, we are able to see his thoughts and understand the reasons behind his actions. Without seeing Parvaiz from his viewpoint, I would have thought that he was a terrible person. I was actually able to empathize with him after seeing what caused him to join ISIS. He was just trying to connect to his father. Each of the perspectives give deeper looks into the characters.
I think that Shamsie put the perspectives of the characters in the order that she did for a couple of reasons. Isma's perspective is at the beginning because she is the protagonist, and she has a lot of connections to each of the other characters in the book. For this reason, Shamsie is able to give a little bit of an introduction on each of the characters through Isma's chapter. The chapters about Eamonn and Parvaiz were next because both of the chapters have similarities. Both Eamonn and Parvaiz were trying to learn more about their fathers and really connect with their fathers, so I think putting these two sections back-to-back highlights the similarities between the two characters within the theme of father-son relationships. Also, putting Parvaiz's chapters after Eamonn's was really useful in transitioning the story. Towards the end of Eamonn's chapters, Eamonn wants to learn more about Parvaiz from Aneeka to help her with bringing him back, and Karamat disapproves of Aneeka because of Parvaiz's terrorism. Therefore, Parvaiz was heavily mentioned towards the end of Eamonn's section, so learning about Parvaiz next was a smooth transition to understanding Parvaiz. Aneeka's chapter was next due to the strong bond between Parvaiz and her. It makes it more emotional to see how the death of her brother is perceived by her. Karamat's chapter was last maybe because his part of allowing Parvaiz's body to come back to Britain was needed at the end.
There's always at least two sides to every story. I totally agree with you about how our perceptions of Parvaiz shift once we have the opportunity to hear his perspective; even if I strongly disagreed with his decisions, I could never demonize him after reading his section and discovering more of his inner thoughts.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the transitions are very smooth thus far, and each section we learn more and more until we get the full story. Isma's section seems to introduce the characters and relationship, while we begin to understand the problem and a potential solution in Eammon's section. Through Parvaiz, we understand how the problem has happened and sets up the rest of the book.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree that Eammon and Parvaiz are on in the same because they are both trying to follow in their fathers footsteps and are learning what it is to "be a man."
ReplyDeleteI never even thought of the similarities between Eamonn and Parvaiz when it comes to their father or even connected them. It is so interesting how they have such different views of their fathers and such different relationships with them, Parvaiz never met his dad and Eamonn knew his throughout life, but both were essentially fatherless.
ReplyDeleteI hadn't thought about how the order of characters paralleled the increasing level of emotions that happened as the story progressed. I agree that having Parvaiz come later upped the intensity and concern in the minds of the reader and, as we learn later, that of the characters.
ReplyDeleteDoes the novel have a single protagonist? If so, who would it be? If not, why doesn't it and how does this affect the way we respond to the story?
ReplyDeleteI agree that Shamsie intentionally structured the story this way to show that we have to take into account all perspectives to understand a story. This has been true for both many works of literature and real life events.
ReplyDelete