Rating: 
Summary: It's not the best but it's still good.
Review: I was looking forward to reading this after I read her first book. But I was disappointed when I finished the book. Lahiri's so good at developing and describing her characters. That it almost felt like I grew up with them. But in the quest to develop her characters, she somehow forgot to develop her story. I'm still at a loss on what the story is all about really since Lahiri had a tendency to scatter it around. But it is a good book nonetheless. Her characters are so well-developed that they all felt like real people to me. For me that was the saving grace for this book. If you like books that have well-developed characters or you're a fan of Lahiri, then read this. It's not for everyone but it's still a good read.
Rating: 
Summary: Good
Review: A nice sophomore effort from Lahiri. She fashioned a well thought out, engaging yarn this time. Gogol Ganguli's family certainly has some similar qualities to my own (being a second-generation Indian myself). As mentioned in previous reviews, I felt that the lack of other cultures in the story, combined with some overtly stereotypical behavior from Gogol's family, hindered a full enjoyment of the book. Still, it was certainly well written and, at points, moving.
Rating: 
Summary: well-written but depressing
Review: As nearly everyone else agrees, Ms. Lahiri's powers of description are pretty good. However I get so tired of reading about first and second-generation immigrants only interacting with Americans of European descent--as if the other cultures of this nation don't even exist. Where are the Hispanic, Black or (other)Asian friends/encounters? Or is she trying to say that's all who they crave interaction with outside of their own culture? I also detect a thread of self-loathing in some of the characters (the Indian girlfriend who is proud that some people think she is French, for example). I found this book profoundly disappointing and even depressing, and did not especially like the character of Gogol. I did however feel for his mother, giving birth to a child in a new country, far from family and her own culture. Ms. Lahiri described her emotions very well. On the whole this book is well-written but avoid it if you don't like a depressing or somewhat self-loathing tone in a novel.
Rating:
Summary: Recommended to Lahiri Fans
Review: Jhumpa Lahiri's The Namesake did not disappoint. True, I believed her Interpreter of Maladies was an extraordinary work, and I was eager to see if she could sustain such brilliance throughout a singular story. The quick answer is that she does not. But that doesn't make this a bad book -- just not an especially memorable one. Because the synopsis of the story is mentioned in most of the other reviews, I won't dwell on it here. There are numerous Induan writers out there today and this book probably suffered a bit in comparison to all (...) But I can't sell Lahiri short. She's a marvelous writer and I believe most people will enjoy her book
Rating: 
Summary: Not stellar but interesting that it's a best seller
Review: This book was easy to read - and for me that is its secret. Lahiri's clear prose demystifies what for most Americans is still a largely 'strange' culture. Yet the rituals, and foods, described are enough of a departure from the norm to be of compelling interest to many readers. Also - the lack of previous narratives about a very specific Indian immigrant experience -- that of well educated, Brahmin, well-off but not wealthy (ie - securely middle class) immigrants, mostly in the tech industry or the professions -- has made this book popular among first generation Indians who feel the story "resonates" with their own. Recently a friend who describes himself as "unliterary" said he enjoyed the book because he'd never read a book before that captured his own experience so closely.
The thing that's rather sad is that books in this genre which have taken on darker, more interesting and potent themes have simply not sold as well as Lahiri's work. While writing style must in part account for this, I think it's also the sanitized version of "immigrant conflict" she consistently delivers that makes her work stand out. Her dissociation from other Indian writers is somewhat sad as well: she is forced to do this to maintain a sense of "literary quality" key to her insider status -- yet clearly her writing is not de novo, and a large part of her audience is made up of Indian and other South Asian readers whose taste for this genre has benefited her sales. It's not bad; it's not good. It's a huge step up from a lot of mass market paperbacks -- but it's nowhere near the quality of Edwidge Danticat, Junot Diaz, Zadie Smith, Susan Choi, Sandra Cisneros, Monique Truong, Rikki Ducarnet, Jessica Hagedorn. Yet all these writers have been much more 'ghettoized', in terms of being identified as "ethnic writers" in a way Lahiri hasn't -- because they write about things that might make the average American reader react to with shame, anger, sadness, guilt. I found myself asking: What is the point? What is the point of endlessly detailing the minutiae of a certain kind of difference only in terms of its interiority, and never with an eye to external conflict, savagery, politics or morals? Some of her short stories do take on the larger world in a way that liked a bit better - but only glancingly, and with a kind of acceptance of the random cruelty of strangers that I found deeply cynical, and without the vibrant kind of questioning and perusal that you find in a writer like Anita Desai, for example, who also writes very plainly and crisply, but whose characters have a depth that Lahiri's lacks. But Desai is less likely to sell the way Lahiri has, because her books are not quite as easy to read; because they make you feel, think, and directly confront an 'alien' culture on its own terms.
Rating: 
Summary: rather good
Review: "The Namesake" is the debut novel by Jhumpa Lahiri. She has previously written the Pulitzer Prize winning short story collection "The Interpreter of Maladies". This is the story of immigrants from India and is also the story of their son, Gogol Ganguli. Ashoke and Ashima are married in India in a marriage arranged by their parents (as is the custom). Just after the wedding they travel to America where Ashoke is first a student at MIT, then later a professor. While Ashoke is able to feel a connection to this new country (he starkly remembers an older friend saying that his one mistake was leaving American to return to India), Ashima feels her immigrant status keenly. She holds to the ways of the Bengali and when their son is born they want to name him in the old manner: the grandmother will send a letter with his Good Name. A Good Name is that which is the official name on record and is used publicly and professionally. The private name is that which is only used among family and friends. But this is America and the child may not be releases from a hospital without a name on the birth certificate. The parents decide to name their son Gogol, after the Russian author Nikolai Gogol who, in a roundabout way, was instrumental in saving the life of Ashoke when he was a young man. They never intended this to be his Good Name and they waited for the letter from the grandmother to come, but it never does and so right up until Gogol is ready to go to kindergarten the only name he has is Gogol. When Gogol is to enroll in kindergarten his parents give him the Good Name of Nikhil and try to force both Gogol and the school to use it, but he refuses and so does the school. His name is Gogol. I stressed this part of the novel because it raises a rather large theme within the novel: that of identity. It seems that everyone in "The Namesake" is dealing with their identity. Ashima is trying to hold onto the Bengali cultural identity while her two children, Gogol and Sonia, are trying to break free of that identity. Gogol and Sonia find partners that match, for a time, what they feel their identities should be. "The Namesake" takes us on the journey of the Ganguli family over the course of more than two decades. After Gogol graduates high school he decides to legally change his name because of his deep dissatisfaction with his name. Strangely enough, Gogol decides on Nikhil, the name he would not accept as a child. The novel takes Gogol through his college years at Yale, his relationships with women, his marriage (and divorce) and his reconciliation with his mother. All this is truly a quest for identity (in particular, his marriage to a Bengali woman with a similar identity issue). Simply put, this is a good book. It is infused with quality and good writing and Lahiri gives us a good sense of who these characters are. The fact that I didn't truly care what happened to Gogol did not lessen my enjoyment of the book at all. Throughout Lahiri's short stories and into this novel, I have enjoyed stepping into the world she has created and meeting her characters. To me, Jhumpa Lahiri feels like a more accomplished Zadie Smith ("White Teeth") and "The Namesake" is much stronger than Smith's second novel "The Autograph Man". I look forward to Jhumpa Lahiri's next novel (or short story collection).
Rating:
Summary: a disappointment
Review: I loved Interpreter of Maladies but felt that Lahiri was unable to grow into the novel format. Though beautifully written in parts, the novel does not hold together as a whole. None of the characters are fully developed and some of the recurring themes (like Gogol's name) become formulaic and trite. Also, as a northeasterner who has lived in all the cities where Gogol lives I felt her constant references to specific locations was a shorthand that would date her book. Finally, I must say that I know people who fit into the yuppie/urban hip NYC milleu that she depicts and liked them even less in the book.
Rating:
Summary: Lovely, But No Masterpiece
Review: Jhumpa Lahiri has a particular talent for describing the textures of life both inner and outer - the Gangulis of the "The Namesake" come alive through vivid descriptions of their home, their food, and their quiet, unspoken feelings of alienation from the world of clashing cultures they inhabit. These details are rendered in lovely, deliberate prose, and the book is a pleasant one for curling up on the couch on a particularly lazy afternoon. Lahiri has a distinctive voice - no small accomplishment - and she is a very talented writer, but not yet a great one. "The Namesake" - like "Interpreter of Maladies", Lahiri's slightly better short-story collection - is very good, but lacks the passion that makes good works great. The Gangulis are well-drawn, multi-dimensional characters; they just need a dose of passion to bring them to life. Lahiri's writing describes, it narrates, but it lacks vibrancy and any hint of danger. When it becomes less inhibited, it will be truly great.
Rating:
Summary: A star or two more, if expectations weren't so high
Review: Perhaps Lahiri's talents are more suited to the short story. The origin and continuing tale of how Gogol both got and related to his name is beautifully formed. The ending is particularly moving. Likewise, the evolution of this family as a whole is convincing and touching. However, I didn't find a single individual character, including Gogol, to be compelling. They were often more defined by their immigrant status than any aspect of self-invention. A certain determinism seemed to drive their actions. Add that to a preponderance of list-like details, especially in the realm of food, and, for me, The Namesake was ultimately disappointing.
Rating:
Summary: Youth Remembered..
Review: The initial bit about Gogol growing up in America with his American lifestyle and outlook in life in stark contrast to his parent's inherent traditionalism can be identified with by a lot of NRI kids. I think it's something we've all gone through and a very well-written story that brings that to mind is extremely moving. I guess it is only fitting that I give the book a perfect 5! Definately a great read!
|
