As it’s written, it’s really good and captures a lot of details that wouldn’t have been able to be covered in first person, but I feel like more emotions and all of the reactions and assumptions Smita made about other people’s reactions to her character would have been better conveyed in the first person. Even from the beginning, it’s evident that she is very sensitive to every interaction she has in India, and it would have been more enticing to feel that and get to know exactly how everything culminated over time. I do understand that limiting the first person to Meena makes her parts feel more powerful, but I still feel like her character would have benefited from the first person perspective.
by coratle
1 Comment
I get what you’re saying about Smita’s character – her internal struggle with being caught between cultures would’ve hit way harder if we were stuck in her head the whole time. The way she’s constantly reading into every glance and comment from locals, that hyperawareness of being an outsider, could’ve been so much more intense with first person narration
But I think Umrigar made the right call keeping it third person for Smita while giving Meena the first person treatment. Meena’s sections already feel so raw and immediate, and if both characters had first person it might’ve gotten confusing or diluted the impact. Plus the third person lets us see how Smita’s American perspective sometimes blinds her to things that are obvious to everyone else around her – that distance actually works in the story’s favor
The contrast between the two narrative styles also mirrors how differently these women experience their circumstances. Meena’s trapped and desperate voice versus Smita’s more analytical but emotionally turbulent observations – it creates this interesting tension that I’m not sure would work as well if they were both written the same way