I Met Gogol

During the Thanksgiving break my family got together with many of my cousins, aunts, and uncles. However, it is my twenty-three-year-old cousin from Washington D.C. in particular that I would like to focus on because of his striking similarities to Gogol. In a physical sense, my cousin closely represents Kal Penn’s portrayal of Gogol in the movie during his college years because he is tall and thin and has long dark hair that he keeps tangled and messy. My cousin does not like his first name (which I will intentionally omit) and instead chooses to be called by his middle name, James. James, like Gogol, has one main disagreement with his parents. James’s parents wanted him to go to college and earn a degree but he chose not to. Also, James maintained a fairly distant relationship with his parents until their divorce several years ago. After the divorce he grew much closer to his mother and he looks out and cares for her. Similar to Gogol, James has a girlfriend that his family does not approve of. I met her a year or two ago and I can definitely understand why. However, it is not James’s similarity to Gogol that prompted me to write this blog entry, it is his one main difference with Gogol that has inspired me. Gogol educates himself at Yale while James unfortunately has never gone to college. This is such a shame because James really is an intellectual person and I think he would have enjoyed the academic environment at college. Additionally, without a college degree it is difficult to have a real impact on the world. James I think has sadly learned this the hard way. He is a very driven and motivated person and he campaigns and speaks out for what he believes in. He has traveled the world to protes the G20 summit, he has protested capitalism, he has gone to great lengths to support the labor movement, and he now labels himself as an anarchist. He can protest all he wants, and he can act out for what he thinks is best, but without a college degree it is nearly impossible to actually have an impact or work to rewrite policy or work as a political figure. The real reason I wanted to write this blog entry is because I want to emphasize the importance of a college education to everyone reading this. I do not think this is a big problem with our AP English class but you never know, James turned down admission to Brown because he wanted to try to focus his efforts on pressing world issues. Although he never said it this weekend, I think he deeply regrets his decision.

Kal Penn? Maybe Not So Bad After All

Like most of you, when I first saw Kal Penn as Gogol in the movie, I started cracking up because I kept waiting for him to go to White Castle. It is absolutely hilarious to see a twenty-nine year old guy with long hair play the role of a high school student. I really question the director and producer of The Namesake who chose Kal Penn to play the role of a very serious character. Some of Penn’s previous movies include Harold and Kumar go to White Castle, Epic Movie, and Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay. I think the choice to have Kal Penn act as Gogol really affects the movie as a whole. It is very difficult to keep a straight face and focus on some of the more saddening or intense moments from the film when one looks at Gogol’s face and can only think of the actor’s absurd and ridiculous roles in other movies. However, while finding some information for my blog post I realized that maybe Kal Penn actually was not such a bad choice. First of all, he truly is an Indian American; he recalls stories from his grandparents about marching with Mahatma Ghandi and trying to earn independence for India. At birth his parents gave him the name, Kalpen Modi. Also, although his acting roles give him the perception of being unintelligent and oblivious, in reality he is a well-educated and informed citizen. As a college student, he graduated from the University of California Los Angeles where he majored in both film and sociology. In 2008, he served as a visiting professor at the University of Pennsylvania in the Asian American Studies department. Even more impressive is that he is currently working on a graduate certificate in international security at Stanford University. The most surprising thing about Kal Penn is that President Obama appointed him to a public office. Soon after Barack Obama’s innaguration in 2009, the president gave Kal Penn the position of Associate Director of the White House Office of Public Engagement. Despite my previous misconceptions, Kal Penn actually seems like the best actor for Gogol. Like Gogol he is Indian American, he is very intelligent and motivated to work hard, and he changed his name from his given name. This new information about Kal Penn will allow me to concentrate more on the rest of the movie, but still they could have at least cut his hair.   

Nonfiction versus Fiction

As I did some research on Jhumpa Lahiri for my datasheet, I was struck by the similarities between her life and the lives of the characters she creates in The Namesake, especially Gogol. First of all, since Lahiri was born in 1967 and Gogol was born very close to this year, the two experience similar cultures and eras growing up in America. Lahiri, from the age of three grew up in America with two Bengali American parents and just like Gogol, Lahiri considers herself to be an American. Lahiri recalls that as a child her mother diligently tried to expose her to their Bengali heritage and likewise, her family frequently took trips back to Calcutta to visit relatives. This experience growing up as a Bengali American perfectly parallels Gogol’s childhood in the novel. Similar to Gogol’s conversation with Candace Lapidus, when Lahiri started kindergarten, her teacher decided to call her by her pet name because her good name was too difficult to pronounce. Lahiri once stated, “I always felt so embarrassed by my name…You feel like you’re causing someone pain by just being who you are.” Lahiri mirrors her own feelings towards her name with Gogol’s thoughts regarding his own name. As I researched, I was so happy to see that Lahiri’s own life tied into the experiences and events of the book. In my opinion, a book that is based off a true story or a real life occurrence is much more impactful for a reader. A fiction book seems inspirational and moving while I read it but it does not have the same lasting effect of a nonfiction novel. Nonfiction novels have a longer lasting impression because the story is true and there is actually a person who faced the great tragedy in the book or who overcame the adversity. For example, Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl, Angela’s Ashes, and Three Cups of Tea all stick with me for a long time because it is very motivational that the author depicts a person’s own life. On the other hand, in novels like The Namesake, Lahiri can create any situation she wants in order to engineer the perfect story for readers: Lahiri can cause Moushumi to admit she cheated on Gogol as the two travel to spend a weekend together, she can create the train accident that Ashoke lived through, and she can manufacture all the details associated with the Ganguli’s acclimation to America. Nonfiction novels impact me as I read them and I am definitely influenced by the message that the author wants to convey, but I feel that these messages are more ephemeral than those from a nonfiction novel. Therefore, I was pleased to see the similarities that exist between Lahiri and Gogol because now The Namesake will impact me more as I realize that the basis of the story comes from a real person—Jhumpa Lahiri. 

Symbolism for Past Present and Future

        As I looked back over chapter ten, I was struck by the significance of the final paragraph. Lahiri fills the paragraph with symbolism for Moushuni’s current and future relationship with Gogol. While Moushumi waits for Dimitri in his apartment, she closes her eyes, and then “When she opens them a moment later the sun has slipped away, a lone sliver of it now diminishing into the floorboards” (267). Moushumi closing her eyes represents her time with Dimitri because Lahiri makes it seem like Moushumi closes her eyes on Gogol and instead focuses on this new man. Then, the sun slipping “away” serves as a symbol for the upcoming divorce with Gogol. As Moushumi spends more time with Dimitri, her relationship with Gogol slowly “diminishes into the floorboards.” Since the narrator’s tone here is factual and dry, I easily insert my own feelings about the situation. Like most readers, I feel disappointed with Moushumi because she fails to ever communicate her true feelings with Gogol and she never even gives him a chance or tries to talk about her how she feels with Gogol. While Moushumi sits in the chair in Dimitri’s apartment he comes back and puts his key in the lock, “slicing sharply into the apartment” (267). The key “slicing sharply” into the lock serves as a symbol for Dimitri coming into Moushumi’s life and quickly and aggressively slicing Gogol away from Moushumi. The use of the forceful diction like “slicing sharply” creates an assertive tone and it leads me to despise Dimitri and everything he stands for. Additionally, the dishonesty from Moushumi forces me to pity Gogol even more than I already do. The paragraph concludes with Moushumi trying to replace the book on the shelf and “searching for the gap in which it stood” (267). Lahiri uses the book to represent Gogol, and because Moushumi cannot seem to find the book’s space, Lahiri symbolizes Moushumi no longer having a special place for Gogol in her heart. This symbolism really makes me feel sympathy for Gogol. It seems like he has dealt with so many unfortunate occurrences in his life and now there is just one more waiting for him—divorce. The symbolism at the end of chapter ten solidifies the fact that Moushumi no longer loves Gogol and as a reader I wonder why Lahiri chooses to have Gogol’s wife cheat on him? I am intrigued to finish the book so I can learn what message Lahiri ultimately wishes to convey to her readers.

I Love America

For some reason or another, the recent midterm elections in the United States stirred up a patriotic fervor with me. The workings of democracy and the ability of all people over the age of eighteen to vote make me proud to call myself a United States citizen. Three specific lines of Rita Dove’s  “Lady Freedom Among Us” help to explain my patriotism: “don’t even think you can ever forget her/ don’t even try/ she’s not going to budge” (26-28). The repetition of the powerful diction like “don’t even” along with the firm diction such as “ever” allow Dove to create an assertive tone. Dove’s assertive tone reminds readers of the assertiveness American’s displayed in order to earn freedom from Britain. Dove’s juxtaposition of “she,” a synecdoche for freedom, with the forceful tone aids her in commending America for its aggressive actions to earn freedom. Dove wants readers to remember the great sacrifices early colonists made in order to separate from Britain and furthermore, Dove wants current United States citizens to never take their freedom for granted. Dove also juxtaposes “she,” a synecdoche for freedom, with the persistent diction like “budge” in order to create a prideful tone. Dove elicits feelings of pride from Americans because of the country’s success with preserving freedom for over 240 years. Dove wants Americans to never forget to remain thankful to the country for protecting the freedom of each and every citizen. Lady Freedom represents the uniqueness of America because as she sits atop the dome, she overlooks the inauguration of every new president of the United States outside of the Capitol Building. Lady Freedom overlooks the peaceful transfer of power from one president to the next. This handing over of power makes America the best country on earth. Too often in the modern world we read about coups or the military stepping in to prevent one party from taking the dictatorship from the current party. Luckily, as a United States citizen, freedom and an effective democratic system shield the country from these unfortunate occurrences.