Narration in “Interpreter of Maladies”

[Ms. Miller, MAED & MA]

Watch the CB video on narration. In your post, outline three takeaways from the video. In your response, discuss how the narrative point of view impacts the narrative. Discuss in detail what the narrator includes and does not include in the reading. Similar to the video, distinguish the evidence between the biases, motivations and understanding. Consider how the story would be different if it were told from the other characters in the work. Address the limitations.Include textual evidence of the subjective point of views.

Word Count: 250
Respond to 1 peer in a minimum of 25 words.

[Anthony Bizzaro]

Three main takeaways I had from the college board video was, how does the narrator's details they choose to show or omit influence our perception of the story, how would bias change how we view and feel about the narrator, and finally what are the limitations of the narrator. The point of narrative often skews our perspective because us as the reader are forced to view the story from the narrator's pov. In the short story "Interpreter of Maladies" we view the situation from the perspective of Mr. Kapasi. Because of this perspective we see bias because we only see what he hears or thinks. An example is when he thinks about how "Mr and Mrs Das act more sibling than parent", Mr. Kapasi doesn't understand the situation especially this early in the story so this take immediately skews our perspective of the Das's. The limitations here are that we are only able to understand situations that happen to Mr. Kapasi whether he views them, thinks about them, is apart of them, or is explained to him. These limitations help us understand the biases that Mr. Kapasi holds and gives us insight into things such as how he views the Das's relationship from the perspective of a man actively trying to court someone in that said relationship. Towards the end of the story we see another event where we see a misunderstanding about Mrs. Das and Mr. Kapasi's relationship seen by Mrs. Das saying,"Mr. Kapasi, don t you have anything to say? I thought that was your job". While we understand this event in the moment because we viewed the story through Mr. Kapasi we also viewed Mrs. Das as a sexual relationship rather than the fatherly one she claimed to be trying to pursue. Mr. Kapasi's biases not only tricked him but also tricked the reader into not realizing the true meaning of their relationship.

[Luigi Lozano]

A writer's reliability can affect a narrative by how an audience, or a reader, views a character. Specifically, it is the reveal of information provided by a singular perspective of the narrator that showcases our interpretation of the text. A single person can express how we judge the story; their story drives our interest as we gravitate towards that perspective and begin to understand the situation. However, there exists an issue with understanding a singular narrative in a story. Expressing lots of information shows that the narrator wants the audience to know all the details to the story; the lack thereof of details show how limited and biased the narrator is in expressing ideas. For example, if we were to look only through the lens of the narrator, we are only allowed to see what that individual can see in the story. If we were to expand our perspective, look at different character's point of views, we can see that there is more information to be revealed about the current situation or event. There can be more information to be interpreted based on different characters. On the other hand, if we were to only see the perspective of another character, and not the narrator, then we lose the narrator's subjective perspective. Without the complete picture, it is disappointing to face biases due to the reveal of details/omitted details by the narrator. The bias of culture, knowledge, and perspective limit the amount of understanding the audience can learn from a narrator's story.

[Abraham Z]

Three Takeaways:
- Non-objective, first-person narrators greatly influence how a narrative is conveyed to the reader
- Such narrators contain biases, personal motivations, and understandings which the reader can then interpret as the unreliability of the narrator
- These narrators are also limited, lacking omniscience

IM's Narrator:
The narrative point of view in "Interpreter of Maladies" is not non-objective, nor first-person. Rather, the reader is exposed to an objective narrator, with no true limitations. However, in order to build tension, and by extension curiosity, the narrator is highly selective in their selection of details, as well as their sequence of revealing details.

Had the narrative been told from Mr. Kapasi's perspective, not much would change, especially considering that the story already consists of many private thoughts of the man. However, had it been through Mr. or Mrs. Das' perspectives, there would be a great deal of biases, motivations, and understandings that would change many aspects of the story. For instance, had it been from Mr. Das' perspective, the reader would not be exposed to Mrs. Das' anguish and her affair, only hints of it. Or perhaps Mr. Das does suspect Mrs. Das' dissatisfaction with the marriage, which would add a new layer to the character of Mr. Das, who would be enduring the marriage for the sake of something greater.

[Anthony Bizzaro]

Mar 23, 2022 7:13:22 GMT -8 Luigi Lozano said:

A writer's reliability can affect a narrative by how an audience, or a reader, views a character. Specifically, it is the reveal of information provided by a singular perspective of the narrator that showcases our interpretation of the text. A single person can express how we judge the story; their story drives our interest as we gravitate towards that perspective and begin to understand the situation. However, there exists an issue with understanding a singular narrative in a story. Expressing lots of information shows that the narrator wants the audience to know all the details to the story; the lack thereof of details show how limited and biased the narrator is in expressing ideas. For example, if we were to look only through the lens of the narrator, we are only allowed to see what that individual can see in the story. If we were to expand our perspective, look at different character's point of views, we can see that there is more information to be revealed about the current situation or event. There can be more information to be interpreted based on different characters. On the other hand, if we were to only see the perspective of another character, and not the narrator, then we lose the narrator's subjective perspective. Without the complete picture, it is disappointing to face biases due to the reveal of details/omitted details by the narrator. The bias of culture, knowledge, and perspective limit the amount of understanding the audience can learn from a narrator's story.

I agree with your take about how if we view from other perspectives we can better understand the story. It’s important to recognize those biases and be able to see the story from other perspectives.

[Christine Gu .-.]

College Board video 7.4 4D, Explain the functions of the narrator/speaker, shows how a narrator’s perspective of what they choose to include or not include reveals about their biases, motive, and understanding of the situation. The narrator essentially shapes which details are shared, which influences the readers’ understanding of the characters and situations while providing details others cannot.
In the “Interpreter of Maladies,” the story is seen through Mr. Kapsi’s perspective. The build up tension from the couple’s arguments fed to the misunderstanding of the relationship between Mrs. Das and Mr. Kapsi, because of the details Mr. Kapasi chose to include. This feeds into the misunderstanding of how Mr. Kapasi views Mrs. Das, especially when they arrived at the Sun Temple since it had carved statues “erotic in nature” (22) and from Mr. Kapsi’s perspective, the power of the situation influenced how he perceived that “Mrs. Das has taken an interest in him” (22). Through the trip, Mrs. Das has shared numerous stories about her life to Mr. Kapasi, even how Bobby was not actually Mr. Das’s. These details that he choose to include also mislead the readers to think an affair was going to happen, only to be shattered when he realized that Mrs. Das only “thought of him as a parent.” (27) Not only Mr. Kapasi misunderstood, it also revealed his motive that he was unsatisfied with his own marriage, and unlike his wife, Mrs. Das was intrigued by his job. He thought that there was a connection between them since they are both troubled in marriage, but it was only in his cloudy mind.
The story would have taken a different turn if it was from another character’s perspective. If it was from Mrs. Das’ perspective, the readers would not have misunderstood their intentions, rather it would focus on the troubles going on in her mind.

[Celina Espanta]

"Interpretation of Maladies" written by Jhumpa Lahiri is told in a third person perspective which makes the narrator able to convey more information about the characters, and the narrator has control over which information about any of the characters should be revealed and when it should be unveiled. Though, the narrator chooses to not include crucial information about Mrs. Das and her affair until the end of the story. Instead, the narrator mainly focuses on Mr. Kapasi and his thoughts about the Das family and Mrs. Das herself. Mr. Kapasi views the Das family as "all like siblings... Mr. and Mrs. Das behaved like an older brother and sister, not parents." (16). The narrator chooses to keep certain information about the Das family in order to maintain the naivety and curiosity of Mr. Kapasi to the family. Once the narrator reveals that one of the sons, Bobby, is not Mr. Das' and how "For eight years I [Mrs. Das] haven’t been able to express this to anybody, not to friends, certainly not to Raj. He doesn’t even suspect it. He thinks I’m still in love with him." (27). With this new information revealed by the narrator, it gives the readers more understanding on why Mrs. Das chooses to neglect her children and "bicker" with her husband on who should take their daughter to the restroom. If this information was told by another character in the story, it would have been more biased as it would be from a first person's point of view which is limited.

[Makayla Hernandez]

After watching the college board video, I was able to take away a good amount of information about the narrator and how well they can persuade the story simply with just their choice of words. The video emphasized the narrator’s influence in what the readers will understand about the story and its characters, shaping how the story is being told. This roots from what information they choose to reveal to and/or hold back from the audience. This raises questions such as, “why didn’t the narrator tell them?” or “what are they hiding?” We also learn that first person point of view is very limiting in terms of perspective due to the fact that we as readers cannot have insight into the other characters’ thoughts as well. The story of “Interpreter of Maladies” would be different if we saw it from another point of view, such as the children, because of their very different interactions; for example, the children’s feelings of neglect were not showcased from the current perspective of the story, although, if we heard it from their side, we would most likely get more hints as to how much or how little Mr. and Mrs. Das’ actions affect them. The flirtation between Mr. Kapasi and Mrs. Das might not have even been discovered if it was from a different perspective because no one else really seemed to notice it, such as when they were near each other, admiring the sculptures while Mrs. Das continued to walk past her own children as if they were strangers.

[Makayla hernandez]

Mar 23, 2022 7:18:20 GMT -8 Celina Espanta said:

"Interpretation of Maladies" written by Jhumpa Lahiri is told in a third person perspective which makes the narrator able to convey more information about the characters, and the narrator has control over which information about any of the characters should be revealed and when it should be unveiled. Though, the narrator chooses to not include crucial information about Mrs. Das and her affair until the end of the story. Instead, the narrator mainly focuses on Mr. Kapasi and his thoughts about the Das family and Mrs. Das herself. Mr. Kapasi views the Das family as "all like siblings... Mr. and Mrs. Das behaved like an older brother and sister, not parents." (16). The narrator chooses to keep certain information about the Das family in order to maintain the naivety and curiosity of Mr. Kapasi to the family. Once the narrator reveals that one of the sons, Bobby, is not Mr. Das' and how "For eight years I [Mrs. Das] haven’t been able to express this to anybody, not to friends, certainly not to Raj. He doesn’t even suspect it. He thinks I’m still in love with him." (27). With this new information revealed by the narrator, it gives the readers more understanding on why Mrs. Das chooses to neglect her children and "bicker" with her husband on who should take their daughter to the restroom. If this information was told by another character in the story, it would have been more biased as it would be from a first person's point of view which is limited.

[Abraham Zaman]

Mar 23, 2022 7:10:20 GMT -8 Anthony Bizzaro said:

Three main takeaways I had from the college board video was, how does the narrator's details they choose to show or omit influence our perception of the story, how would bias change how we view and feel about the narrator, and finally what are the limitations of the narrator. The point of narrative often skews our perspective because us as the reader are forced to view the story from the narrator's pov. In the short story "Interpreter of Maladies" we view the situation from the perspective of Mr. Kapasi. Because of this perspective we see bias because we only see what he hears or thinks. An example is when he thinks about how "Mr and Mrs Das act more sibling than parent", Mr. Kapasi doesn't understand the situation especially this early in the story so this take immediately skews our perspective of the Das's. The limitations here are that we are only able to understand situations that happen to Mr. Kapasi whether he views them, thinks about them, is apart of them, or is explained to him. These limitations help us understand the biases that Mr. Kapasi holds and gives us insight into things such as how he views the Das's relationship from the perspective of a man actively trying to court someone in that said relationship. Towards the end of the story we see another event where we see a misunderstanding about Mrs. Das and Mr. Kapasi's relationship seen by Mrs. Das saying,"Mr. Kapasi, don t you have anything to say? I thought that was your job". While we understand this event in the moment because we viewed the story through Mr. Kapasi we also viewed Mrs. Das as a sexual relationship rather than the fatherly one she claimed to be trying to pursue. Mr. Kapasi's biases not only tricked him but also tricked the reader into not realizing the true meaning of their relationship.

The idea that Mrs. Das desired a father/sage figure in Mr. Kapasi is quite interesting. Perhaps if she went to therapy, one conflict of the past that would be attempted to be integrated is a distant/weak father. This weakness is reflected in the weakness of Mr. Das, which Mrs. Das contrasts with the strong passion of Bobby's father, possibly something missing in her life which will be the solution to her maladies.

[Safi Saleem]

Three takeaways from the video is that the limitation of the third person narrator that can’t see what the characters feel first hand. Additionally, a narrator perspective can reveal biases with the reading and different understandings. Readers can also infer the narrators biases by nothing which details they choose to include and which is chosen to be omitted. For examples, the narrator in the interpreter of Maladies chose not to include what Mr. Das feels and how he thinks about the relationship. The whole time it was Mrs. Das feeling lost in the relationship and disillusioned but we never get the same type of nuance reasoning for Mr. Das. Also, we don’t know what Mr. Das interacts with his children when Mrs. Das was speaking to Mr. Kapasi. This lack of detail for this character shows the bias towards Mrs. Das and what she feels like.

[garrettd]

Three takeaways that I received from this most recent college board video is the concept that a narrator is limited by their perspective, that a narrator can show bias towards a concept, therefore making their trustworthiness lessened, and that what a narrator decided to leave out is just if not more important than what they include as it can display their motives or biases. In “Interpreter of Maladies”, we get to see a third person, omnipresent perspective of the situations that occur on this family tour of the Sun Temple and the hills at Udayagiri and Khandagiri. Though this narrator is privy to the thought and actions of the characters, they seem to limit themselves to only expressing Mr. Kapasi’s thoughts, merely telling the dialogue and not the inner thoughts of the other characters, Mrs. Das in particular as her expressions and motives elude even the narrator it seems. Should the narration be allowed to expand to encompass all the thought of all the characters, we as the reader might be able to understand better the “pain” that Mrs. Das frequently addresses as well as her unhappiness. Also, we might be able to see from Mr. Das’ perspective and with that a new look on Mrs. Das and how she really behaves with those around her. Instances such as Mrs. Das watching Bobby, her son, play with Mr. Das and us the reader not getting a notion that anything is awry until she herself says that “He’s not his… Raj. He’s not Raj’s son” just goes to show the limitation of the narration but also the power that this limitation conveys, restricting the reader’s knowledge until the climax of the story of these characters.

[Lani Dinh]

The main takeaways seem to be consistent with the overall reliability and qualities as well as personality that shines through the speaker given their narrative and the story being told from their perspective. The way in which their narratives have implicit biases in them can tell not just about the character alone but a lot about the manner and speed even as the story is going to unfold, depending on the type of storyteller they are and how they recount their experiences in the past. Once a bias is identified this often speaks heavily to the trust or mistrust the reader will have in the narrator as well. The narrator will often include pieces of evidence or memories that depict them in a favorable light and reveal much of their morality as well as their motivations too. Only through the detail and articulation of an individual narrative can one really begin to understand many of their points and what it reveals about their deeper selves. An example in the text is the progression of Mr. Kapasi's romantic interest in Mrs. Das and how bleak his point of view gets depending on the situation at hand. Upon a disheartening comment she made,"The feeling he had had toward her, that had made him check his reflection in the rearview mirror as they drove, evaporated a little. " The impact the motions have then on the speed and reliability on the story when emotions, especially romantic ones are prevalent through the tale as the author sculpts a feeling of finality and expected yet crushing loss of romance and complications toward he end. Overall though, the narrative is evident in the way it shifts and bends with suspense when accomodating for his feeling and motivations through the story.

[Safi Saleem]

Mar 23, 2022 7:18:58 GMT -8 Makayla Hernandez said:

After watching the college board video, I was able to take away a good amount of information about the narrator and how well they can persuade the story simply with just their choice of words. The video emphasized the narrator’s influence in what the readers will understand about the story and its characters, shaping how the story is being told. This roots from what information they choose to reveal to and/or hold back from the audience. This raises questions such as, “why didn’t the narrator tell them?” or “what are they hiding?” We also learn that first person point of view is very limiting in terms of perspective due to the fact that we as readers cannot have insight into the other characters’ thoughts as well. The story of “Interpreter of Maladies” would be different if we saw it from another point of view, such as the children, because of their very different interactions; for example, the children’s feelings of neglect were not showcased from the current perspective of the story, although, if we heard it from their side, we would most likely get more hints as to how much or how little Mr. and Mrs. Das’ actions affect them. The flirtation between Mr. Kapasi and Mrs. Das might not have even been discovered if it was from a different perspective because no one else really seemed to notice it, such as when they were near each other, admiring the sculptures while Mrs. Das continued to walk past her own children as if they were strangers.

I like how you noticed that the different perspective is crucial in us the reader discovering the flirtation between Mr. Kapasi and Mrs. Das.

[Madi Zhuang]

Three takeaways I had from the College Board videos on narration were that the narrator shapes how the story is shared and interpreted, bias and motives are easily conveyed and could be understood by the reader, and that all forms of narration are limited to some extent. The point of view of the narrator, with the most common being first and third person, can skew how the reader may come to understand a certain character, impacting the interpretation of the narrative. In first person narration, more often than not, the narrator chooses to omit negative characteristics of themselves and highlights their strengths. Furthermore, they allow their bias of other characters to show. In third person narration, we have a better understanding of a character’s motives and their understanding of a situation because it offers a broader perspective of the narrative. If “Interpreter of Maladies” was told from the perspective of someone else, such as Mr. Das, we might be told that Mrs. Das was simply acting kind and friendly towards Mr. Kapasi, not romantic as the tour guide interpreted it to be. Mr. Kapasi says “She did not behave in a romantic way toward her husband, and yet she had used the word to describe him,” however, Mrs. Das may interpret that action differently if the story was told from her perspective. This further proves that narrations can be limited because the readers will never fully understand what happened in that particular scene without having at least one character’s bias.